From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Re: [export] Should sidewaystable option automatically add rotating package? Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:45:25 +0800 Message-ID: <87zjrcmdai.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> 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> <874n9kwott.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]:49389) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLkLG-0004AQ-4h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:44:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLkL8-0000xv-QP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:44:38 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f52.google.com ([209.85.160.52]:37118) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VLkL8-0000x4-Gw for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:44:30 -0400 Received: by mail-pb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id wz12so4827025pbc.11 for ; Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:44:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874n9kwott.fsf@gmx.us> (Rasmus's message of "Mon, 16 Sep 2013 21:26:06 +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: Rasmus Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, carsten.dominik@gmail.com On 09/17/13 03:26 AM, Rasmus wrote: > 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). I'm not an expert, but I haven't read about or experienced any particular clashes, so I've made this my standard table package. I'd feel a little weird about enforcing that on most users, though... >>>> - 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 attenti= on. >> 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= time > 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. [...] I'm not too in favor of automatic package detection. Unless it works nearly perfectly, it just seems like trading one kind of user irritation for another. Personally, I _always_ blast the default packages and load my own stuff. One potential middle ground would be providing defaults "sets": for instance LATEX_MATH_DEFAULTS (or whatever), that provided a couple choices for math-related package suites that are known to work well together. Meh, maybe not. > Fixes are usually available. For instance, I use a filter to disable > fontenc/inputenc if pdflatex is not used (it breaks xelatex for me). If anything was going to be automatically detected and handled, it seems like it should be this. This is one of the main reasons I gave up trying to use the defaults at all. Not too helpful, I know... E