## LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

 Options: Use Forum View Use Monospaced Font Show Text Part by Default Condense Mail Headers Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>] Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>] Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Sebastian Rahtz writes:
>  > and even if it would balk at \footheight unknown or something like
>  > this in the documentation (but only there) i would (as a tester) put
>  > it into *3 but having in that form a line saying, documentation a bit
>  > shaky press return on ...
> i dont agree with this detail, actually. those of who process material
> CTAN to TDS do NOT want to press return, or read documentation, or
> anything. i really think xymtex stays in *5* until someone fixes it to
> run without errors under 2e. but not important for now

important enough if you want to give poential volunteers some criteria
at hand.  users want to read documentation (or in some cases
should:-). if you want to autoprocess for a distribution like tex-live
then i agree that this would rule things out. so okay, perhaps if it
is trivial one should either fix it or mail the author or whatever but
keeping otherwise sound stuff in 5 just because it is having a trivial
problem with the documentation seems to me counter productive

a) you would then at a later stage make the same work again
b) if the code works and documentation mostly it should not be
classified untested (as that is not true)

since it is tested such stuff should be allowed to go at least into *4
in my opinion

frank

ps just to correct a perhaps wrong impression: xymtex does work both
with code and documentation although the documentation uses latex
compat mode --- i was only making up an example