Richard Heck wrote: > On 04/04/2011 02:33 PM, Georg Baum wrote: >> Richard Heck wrote: >>> The point of moving to refstyle was that it does provide >>> translation support, not that we would provide all the translations. >>> Still, I understand the desire to do this kind of thing, and there is a >>> correct way we can do it. And also contribute to refstyle at the same >>> time. >>> >>> The refstyle package allows the use of a custom configuration file >>> instead of refstyle.cfg. What we could do is produce our own >>> configuration file and allow users the choice to use it. This would >>> presumably be a per-document setting. I'm not sure if we can get this >>> working perfectly by 2.0, but we could still get the setting into the >>> file format, even without UI, right away, so we could at least get it >>> working by 2.0.1, say. >> Please don't put this in 2.0. 2.0 is far too late already, and no release >> will be perfect anyway. >> > I meant not to be proposing it for 2.0.0, precisely for the reason you > mention, but I think it would be OK for a later release in the 2.0.x > series. Of course, that is up to Pavel: whether he'll accept a patch that > adds a BufferParam to control this as yet non-existent feature. (It's been > done before.)
technically the bump of file format is still possible, but i'm not sure we go the proper way. the layouttranslation won't be part of latex while this thing should go to upstream. no hard opinions though. pavel
