From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jambunathan K Subject: Re: [odt] htmlfontify + Support for src blockfontification Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 13:52:46 +0530 Message-ID: <81wre9yfmx.fsf@gmail.com> References: <81ty9i1kg5.fsf@gmail.com> <877h6cfk68.fsf@altern.org> <814o1elfkj.fsf@gmail.com> <87ei0hrgcz.fsf@altern.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:58704) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QuKMd-0007YP-WB for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 04:23:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QuKMd-0006xQ-1h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 04:23:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com ([209.85.210.44]:52074) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QuKMc-0006xL-S7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 04:23:39 -0400 Received: by pzk36 with SMTP id 36so5291054pzk.17 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:23:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87ei0hrgcz.fsf@altern.org> (Bastien's message of "Fri, 19 Aug 2011 09:31:11 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Bastien Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Based on my experience I have received far more feedback/bug reports on odt exporter since 7.6 release than when it was in my own git. All three suggestions made here miss the whole point. They are suggesting to hide a useful piece of work underneath githubs, repos etc. - It is not a question of availability but it is a question of availability at the right place where most users can find it without even knowing it. (Did anyone know of org-icons package a few months back?) I am an artist, I need a stage and an audience. I am not a philosopher who keeps his thoughts and work private for his own consumption. - There also seem to be an unarticulated assumption that a transitional software should be as perfect as a released software. It need not be so. Those who have been on the emacs-devel list would know that much of the bidi development is already part of emacs-24 and the discussions last few weeks have been more about tightening the screws and fixing the user-experience component of it. You would also similar parallels with buffer alist related simplifications proposed by martin rudalics. If my understanding is correct, they are genuine interest on the part of emacs developers to steer the patch for overall good. The rule of thumb is that don't hesitate to accept big pieces (provided they are proven worthy - in a proof of concept sense of word). Calling an enhanced htmlfontify.el a duplication is misstating of facts. Again let me cite the example of htmlize. It is available publicly (somewhere?). Why should it be part of contrib dir? I know at some point it was a patched up version of the "original" htmlize. If you are willing to engage in a discussion I can walk through it. If the decision is unilateral I am afraid I cannot do much about it. Btw, I have been sitting on an elpa patch since November of last year. Everytime I submitted I had to spend atleast 1 hr+ to polish it. Now it is totally forgotten. Enough said ... Jambunathan K. --