Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Type: |
Text/Plain; charset=utf-8 |
Date: |
Tue, 1 Aug 2017 17:09:52 +0200 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
base64 |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>> The changed files are used only to generate PDF documentation for
>> one of my packages (ttfautohint), which heavily uses the most
>> recent script additions to Unicode; they are not intended for
>> distribution in a generic way. As soon as the corresponding
>> changes are applied upstream, I will use the upstream packages.
>> However, I can't estimate in advance when updated packages
>> appear...
>
> Er... are you sure that you understand each other?
I think so, yes.
> It seems to me that you, Werner, are saying that you’re not going to
> distribute the files under their original names, and will just use a
> temporary solution until the changes are propagated to the
> distributions;
Yes, for example in my package's version 1.7 I plan to use
`fontspec-patched.sty'.
> while Frank is saying that since you plan to distribute the files
> you should stick to the policy of changing their names.
Yes. Where is the contradiction? Assuming that at the time of my
package's version 1.8 the upstream version of `fontspec.sty' contains
the patches I need, I no longer use `fontspec-patched.sty'.
Werner
|
|
|