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