[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Release schedule.

From: Ralf Angeli
Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Release schedule.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 11:09:19 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

* David Kastrup (2005-05-12) writes:

> a) document Windows startup using tex-mik.el or fptex.el,

Are we going back to the scheme where you had to do both `(require
'tex-site)' and `(require 'tex-mik)' or do you have a way to place
them into `load-path'.  The user could move it manually, but this is
not the nicest way.

> d) write up RELEASE and changes.texi.

changes.texi is pretty much up-to-date except for mentioning the
revamped installation procedures and the integration of preview-latex.

> f) better document requirements, supported platforms, and software to
>    download, in particular on the web page.
> I am sick of hearing the incessant "But what use is that to Windows
> users?" whining.

Have you observed something like this lately?  Personally I cannot
remember hearing this at all.  Most people are aware that Emacs can be
used on many different platforms and that this is also true for
AUCTeX.  Okay, preview-latex is a bit handicapped because of image
support on other display devices than X11.

> We really need to whack people with the information
> that all major desktop operating systems are supported by now, and
> tell what one needs to download on order to get from ground zero to a
> working TeX/LaTeX/Emacs/AUCTeX/preview-latex/RefTeX installation
> depending on your operating system.

Hm, you mean something like a setup tutorial with a wider scope than
the installation instructions in the manual, I guess.  Uwe set up such
a document for Emacs/AUCTeX/RefTeX/etc on Windows modulo MikTeX
installation (in German language):

I am a bit concerned that there are so many combinations possible for
setting up such a system.  There are different TeX systems on
different operating systems, different package management systems
offering different versions of Emacs, AUCTeX, and related software,
and there is Emacs and XEmacs.  One cannot cover all these
combinations and I am not sure maintaining a few selected ones is
_that_ useful.

> It should also be apparent that the above list of points before the
> release does not mention any further code improvements.  And that
> means that people should _test_, _test_, _test_ the current code and
> report back any problems or inconsistencies _now_.  For the various
> operating systems, for the various versions of Emacs and XEmacs we
> support.

I can only emphasize that.  It seems that especially the situation
regarding XEmacs is becoming worse.  Folding in XEmacs has been broken
for about two months and nobody noticed it.  (Maybe I should just
throw out the compatibility code.)  Font locking in XEmacs has been
broken for two days and nobody noticed it.  So while we are getting a
lot of feedback from XEmacs users in general communication channels
(during the last weeks and months it felt like relatively more than
from Emacs users) there is nearly no feedback concerning AUCTeX
development.  This is likely to result in problems after the release


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]