From: Chris Johnsen Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 19:48:52 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] Documentation: rename docbook-xsl-172 attribute to git-asciidoc-no-roff Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20090324090440.GC1799@coredump.intra.peff.net> On 2009 Mar 24, at 04:04, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 03:04:21AM -0500, Chris Johnsen wrote: > >> It seems that the ability to use raw roff codes in asciidoc.conf >> was eliminated by docbook-xsl 1.72.0 _and later_. Unlike the >> 1.72.0-specific XSLT problem, this behavior was not reverted in >> later releases. >> >> This patch aims to make it clear that the affected asciidoc >> attribute (flag) can be reasonably used with docbook-xsl versions >> other than 1.72.0. > > Great, this looks like a definite improvement. Should we be respecting > more DOCBOOK_XSL_* variables than just 172, then? I.e.,: > >> +# For docbook-xsl ... >> +# -1.68.1, set ASCIIDOC_NO_ROFF? (based on changelog from 1.73.0) >> +# 1.69.0-1.71.1, no extra settings are needed? >> +# 1.72.0, set DOCBOOK_XSL_172. >> +# 1.73.0-, set ASCIIDOC_NO_ROFF > > DOCBOOK_XSL_173, etc? > > I don't know that we need to cover _every_ version, but if we can have > specific knobs for individual features (like ASCIIDOC_NO_ROFF), then > maybe it makes sense to aggregate the settings for those knobs for > a few > common versions. I am not opposed to providing more version-specific controls, but I am not sure which versions are important enough to justify their own variables. Are you indicating that 1.73 is important enough because it was a "return to sanity" after 1.72? The versions I listed in the comments were just the ones that the tools' documentation described as needing one adjustment or another. I thought the comments would be an easy way to start tracking which versions were "interesting". -- Chris