Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
On 01/05/2009 18:24, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Uwe Stöhr wrote:
No it was not. What you did was detecting eLyXer but this is not
necessary
when it is integrated.
which we haven't agreed upon
anyway lets turn this into something more constructive -
could the people involved write clearly their standpoint now,
when i guess all the arguments and (possible) plans in the previous
thread
have been given ?
i'm now inclined to the Richard's point of view, that we shouldn't
include
it by default.
I vote for full inclusion for three reasons:
1) the social aspect: Alex looks like a nice and proactive guy. He
_is_ a nice recrue, no doubt about that. We are not being very
inviting with all this fuss about inclusion or not.
How long did Vincent have to wait for commit access? You propose to give
Alex commit access tomorrow?
2) the user aspect: it is so much easier for the user and the packager
to not have to install this additional few kilobytes. Come on guys,
this is only a tiny python script! The fact that we include it doesn't
mean that we endorse it as *the* one and only html converter. The user
don't need to know, the two things are separate.
No one raised size as an issue. Maintainability, comprehensiveness, etc,
were the issues.
3) Alex will get more help with development when it is integrated.
Elyxers really makes no sense without LyX, as simple as that.
Kept external, Alex can decide who helps him. Nothing precludes any of
us from doing so.
rh
