Vaidheeswaran C <vaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sunday 10 May 2015 12:44 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > >> It will land in the trunk once a library using it for Org core is >> implemented. I put it in a separate branch so that such a library can be >> built, discussed and tested. > > 1. Do you, as a maintainer, have any specific plans for this library?
I'm not a maintainer. Anyway, I have no specific plan besides installing it in core once involved parts (both developers and users in the ML) agree on its quality and usefulness. > 2. What conditions should such a library satisfy in order that it is > considered a candidate. I don't use a reference manager myself. However, we are lucky enough to count on users of such things on the ML. Their opinion matters. A candidate should be useful enough to make at least a part of them willing to use it instead of their current set-up. > 3. Are there any contenders for this library at this moment. There was a discussion about it a couple of months ago. IIRC, there is a library being developed there. > For example, is ox-jabref.el a contender for this library. If "No", on > what counts it fails to get through the gate. There can be more than one library: one for Jabref, one for Zotero, one for BibTex... Different users have different needs. The question is: which one would be included in Org core? Ideally, org-citation (oc.el for short) could implement the UI, and libraries talking to reference managers (e.g oc-jabref, oc-zotero, oc-bibtex...) could be used as back-ends feeding "oc.el". In this situation, we could include more than one back-end in core. >From an external POV, I think "org-ref.el" pretty much defines what features could be included in "oc.el" (though, some of them would be back-end specific). Regards,
