Hi John,
At 2023-06-30T00:26:32+1000, John Gardner wrote:
> I did review it, but those aren't the changes that worry me. Rather,
> it's the ones they appear to allude to: "support for `\D'f…' *may* (or
> may not) disappear in the next release".
Ah, yes. When I consider the possibility of 1.23.1,
Hi Branden,
If you review the attached diff, it does in fact retain support for the
> feature, it's simply noisy about it.
>
I did review it, but those aren't the changes that worry me. Rather, it's
the ones they appear to allude to: "support for `\D'f…' *may* (or may not)
disappear in the next r
Hi John,
At 2023-06-29T19:45:18+1000, John Gardner wrote:
> Support for 'f' may disappear in the next release, producing an error
> > diagnostic regarding an unrecognized command.
> >
>
> This doesn't sit right with me. Removing an obsolete feature to
> encourage adoption of a newer one runs coun
Hi Branden,
Support for 'f' may disappear in the next release, producing an error
> diagnostic regarding an unrecognized command.
>
This doesn't sit right with me. Removing an obsolete feature to encourage
adoption of a newer one runs counter to Groff's normative handling of
legacy features—a man
