From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: [export] Should sidewaystable option automatically add rotating package? Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:26:06 +0200 Message-ID: <874n9kwott.fsf@gmx.us> References: <87ob7z4nzl.fsf@pinto.chemeng.ucl.ac.uk> <877gentvmv.fsf@gmx.us> <87wqmmos25.fsf@gmail.com> <20130913100125.257db23d@vknecht-intel.unibw-hamburg.de> <87ioy1vya1.fsf@gmx.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37880) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLeR7-0000Q5-Rq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:26:23 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLeR1-00016G-AM for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:26:17 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:63176) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLeR1-00015o-1c for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:26:11 -0400 Received: from pank ([94.34.162.209]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MZTbR-1Ve06P3CHN-00LI3W for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:26:09 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Carsten Dominik's message of "Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:27:05 +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: carsten.dominik@gmail.com Cc: eric@ericabrahamsen.net, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Carsten, Carsten Dominik writes: >> Note: I should be obvious that I prefer to load as little stuff be >> default as possible. That is: I'm biased, but it's OK when everyone >> knows. > > Yes. Of course the cleanest solution would be to load as little > as possible. But convenience and backward compatibility are > also a concern which I would like to consider. I agree. And, as said, people who want a 'clean' solution (to his or her mind) can easily get that. So convenience is certainly something that should be considered! >>> - to add the rotating package >>> - do document that the tabu package is needed when specifying tabu >> >> Note the package loading order might matter. > > Yes, I am aware of this. Can you be specific for this case? I guess > rotating has no load sequence issues. I doubt rotating causes issues as it provides its own environments cf. section 2.2 of its manual. I didn't find any reports on the Internets. > Does tabu have such issues [of conflicting with other packages]? > With which packages (what you know) I don't think tabu causes any problems. It states it doesn't rewrite any existing code (as e.g. tabularx does) cf. p. 1. Perhaps, Eric Abrahamsen (Cc'ed) has more experience with tabu (according to the log Eric added tabu support). Unfortunately, I haven't moved to tabu yet. Supposedly, it can replace most other tabular packages including longtable and it's compatible with many other packages cf. p. 9 of its manual (but that's another story). >>> - do document that amsmath in needed when generating a matrix >> >> and subscripts. And sometimes math (e.g. align). > > amsmath is (edited) in the defualt list, patch by you IIRC. So we > actually do not have to say something about this in the manual. No. >>> The reasoning: >>> >>> - wrapfig and longtable have been in there for a long time, we want to >>> avoid breaking existing files whenever possible >> >> Assuming a mechanism exists that can detect when tabu is to be loaded >> why only apply it there and not to the other optional packages? > > Because any automatic mechanism may cause problems with load sequence, > so packages that are problematic in this way should require user attentio= n. > Hmm, have I just argued agains longtbl by saying this? If we are (i) aware of no known problems with a package and (ii) we assume that loading package X=E2=80=93Z have little impact on compilation t= ime is it then not more rational to just add them as a default package?=20 While automatic package handling is very exciting it could go awry. On conflicts. For me clashes mainly happen between macros defined multiple times, e.g. compare \usepackage{amsmath, wasysym} and \usepackage{wasysym, amsmath}. Exotic math packages, cross-reference packages, algorithm packages seem to be potential sources, but none should conflict with amsmath. There may be conlficts with hyperref, if anything. Packages that are known to cause trouble are usually known. Beside stackoverflow here's an interesting list http://www.macfreek.nl/memory/LaTeX_package_conflicts Fixes are usually available. For instance, I use a filter to disable fontenc/inputenc if pdflatex is not used (it breaks xelatex for me). =E2=80=93Rasmus -- This is the kind of tedious nonsense up with which I will not put