It's always been the "policy" of The LaTeX Collective, meeting in great hall of 
the LaTeX Parliament, to allow developers to do as they wish.

That is, you can't have a policy if you don't have central direction. LaTeX/TeX 
is open-source. The developers must do as they wish. There is no there there.

 Paul Thompson



________________________________
From: Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, May 4, 2011 7:06:28 AM
Subject: Re: Policy regarding engine specific fixes

On 04/05/2011, at 9:02 PM, Philipp Stephani wrote:

> coming from a comment in the question 
>http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/17265, I wonder what the policy of the 
>LaTeX project is concerning packages that work only under pdfTeX or make some 
>assumptions that are not valid in the newer engines. Is it intended that such 
>necessary fixes will be included in the packages or in the kernel, or will the 
>fixes have to be provided in separate packages?


Speaking for myself, I guess it largely depends. We've spoken here before about 
adding a switch to deactivate inputenc in XeLaTeX/LuaLaTeX but no proposals ever 
got off the ground. As for amsmath, that's still maintained by the AMS, and I 
believe they're currently working on an update to that at the moment -- it would 
be best to contact them directly. (I'm not sure who the best contact there would 
be.)

Cheers,
-- Will