On Sun, 02 Jul 2006 16:07:03 +0200, Javier M˙gica de Rivera
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
[Good and bad experiences with new and old code]
> As it can be read in http://www.latex-project.org/code.html you get the
> idea that if you are arriving for first time at LaTeX3 stuff and you are
> quite lost, you should go to the archive, while it is not. Whether you
> are interested or not in the latest code, (even if you don't know what a
> CVS is, as was my case), the CVS repository, with its readme and .ins
> files, is much usefull. Posibly the archive with its 2001 packages (is
> it abandoned?) should be removed, or if there is some reason not to do
> it, the explanation at http://www.latex-project.org/code.html should
> clearly direct new people interested in LaTeX3 to the CVS directory, or
> include the readme and .ins in the archive.
> I hope I haven't bothered you.
Not at all - we welcome feedback!
I'm glad you found the new code quite usable - obviously our intention was
to improve it! :-) Not only in usability but also in accessibility. The
situation was somewhat different when we decided to make the code publicly
available early last year so at the time the statement was true. However,
as you have discovered, that is certainly no longer the case. We will
revise that page in the not too distant future.
> A minor remark: there is an extra " in line 342 of l3basics.dtx.
> Where do I direct in the future such minor remarks about the files? I
> guess this list is not the place to.
I think this list is as good a place as any for now. I have fixed this
along with a few other updates to the code.