On 2015-10-26, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > OK. I just want to make sure we define "there are no regressions". These > tests passed before edd37de8. So it is quite possible that documents > that users have that compile with LyX 2.1.x suddenly fail to compile > with LyX 2.2.0 because of edd37de8. In this sense, there is a > regression.
> So there is a trade-off: the bad side is that there is the possibility > that user's documents suddenly fail to compile. The good side is that we > now encourage the use of polyglossia by default which apparently has > advantages over babel. Jürgen knowingly made this decision and he knows > more than I do to be able to judge this tradeoff so I hesitantly accept > it. Polyglossia has been the better (and sometimes only) choice for use with Xe/LuaTeX Unicode fonts for a long time, but Babel is catching up in the last years. It may be that we need a new keyword for lib/languages, to tag languages where Babel is superior to Polyglossia also with non-TeX fonts. Then, the "automatic" setting (which is also the default "default") could take into account that some languages should use Babel also with non-TeX fonts even if Polyglossia is available for them. Could this prevent some of the regressions? (We need to look carefully, not only if the relevant documents compile without error, but also if the exported document is OK.) Günter
