Path: csiph.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail From: "G. Branden Robinson" Newsgroups: gnu.groff.bug Subject: [bug #57622] [PATCH] doc-old.tmac-u: Remove a superfluous "end of a macro" (..) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 02:36:04 -0500 (EST) Lines: 34 Approved: bug-groff@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20200117-193315.sv93188.87576@savannah.gnu.org> <20200118-160647.sv97361.27890@savannah.gnu.org> <20200204-073604.sv108747.82885@savannah.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1580801769 3196 209.51.188.17 (4 Feb 2020 07:36:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu To: Ingo Schwarze , "G. Branden Robinson" , Bjarni Ingi Gislason , bug-groff@gnu.org Envelope-to: bug-groff@gnu.org X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1001:sendmail.php X-Savane-Server: savannah.gnu.org:443 [209.51.188.79] X-Savane-Project: groff X-Savane-Tracker: bugs X-Savane-Item-ID: 57622 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/60.0 PureBrowser/60.9.0 X-Apparently-From: 1.129.105.166 (Savane authenticated user gbranden) In-Reply-To: <20200118-160647.sv97361.27890@savannah.gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.79 X-BeenThere: bug-groff@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for the GNU version of nroff, troff et al" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <20200204-073604.sv108747.82885@savannah.gnu.org> X-Mailman-Original-References: <20200117-193315.sv93188.87576@savannah.gnu.org> <20200118-160647.sv97361.27890@savannah.gnu.org> Xref: csiph.com gnu.groff.bug:1709 Follow-up Comment #2, bug #57622 (project groff): I'm not sure I agree with this being closed. My opinion: The GNU roff codebase is not supposed to be a museum. Our macro packages should exhibit exemplary style (literally, serve as good examples) insofar as we are aware and able to make them. If there is more value in keeping mdoc-old frozen as an exhibit than in serving as macro package for formatting documents even if the user has the warnings dialed way the hell up, then I submit that it would be better to drop it from the groff distribution. Let other implementations be in the archaeological exhibit business. Certainly there are plenty of moribund SourceForge, GitHub, and even Apache Software Foundation projects (Apache Open Office) fitting this description. My preference would be to re-open the ticket and fix it. Ingo and I have weighed in; would anyone else like to? _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/