On 09/17/2009 09:02 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Alex Fernandez<alejandro...@gmail.com> writes:
Consequently, I think
we ought to be careful here to ensure consistency over time and over
changes in binary distributors. It's in general not a good thing to
provide a feature in earlier releases and fail to provide it in later
releases, and, impressed though I am with elyxer's progress to date,
I'm worried about its status several years into the future.
This is kind of a chicken-and-egg situation. It is hard to have
confidence in a one-man show even if I promise to maintain eLyXer for
the foreseeable future.
This is where having built-in support for lyx2lyx would really increase
confidence.It means that eLyXer will continue to work even if you do not
update it for some release. In the current scheme, you would have to
update it at each format change in trunk if you want it to work with
trunk.
I know you have made this suggestion before, but my sense is that the
design of elyxer makes lyx2lyx integration less helpful than it might
be. What's true, of course, is that lyx2lyx integration would make it
possible to use elyxer with 1.7 files. Of course, you can do that anyway
by exporting to 1.6 and then running elyxer manually; if you had elyxer
configured as a LyX 1.6 --> HTML converter, I think that'd even happen
automagically. However, this will of course not enable elyxer to deal
with any 1.7-specific material, since that may just be converted to ERT,
and elyxer has little choice to but ignore ERT. (LyXHTML export also
ignores ERT, for the same reason, though that is not an issue in this
case.) So there's not really any way around updating elyxer as the
format changes.
Richard
