proposed release schedule for maxima 5.9.3

Robert Dodier writes:
> On 12/9/05, Vadim V. Zhytnikov  wrote:
> 
> 
>>>(2) create doc/info/en and move doc/info/*.texi there
>>>re-enable makefile recursion into doc/info/{es,pt} directories
>>>(make will process all languages)
>>
>>It is much better to make configure options --enable-language-,
>>one per language except English, which triggers processing of
>>corresponding doc/info/
>>English language is processed always by default.
> 
> 
> if you want to modify configure.in in this manner, please go right ahead.
I'm not quite good in automake machinery so I have to learn
how to implement such things properly ;-(
> i hope there will also be an option --disable-language-en ...

Well, we have two options:

1) Keep English language stuff in privileged position - always 
processed, always installed, installation goes into /doc/info
(not /doc/info/en).  After all this is original documentation.
It also make sense as a fall back (default) documentation if
localized one can't be found.

2) Put English documentation on equal footing with
all other languages.

Personally I prefer (1).  Any opinions?

> 
>>>(3) modify rpm spec file to create per-language rpm's.
>>>i believe rpm recognizes a %lang option for that purpose.
>>
>>Each language specific documentation goes into
>>separate rpm package. Say maxima-lang-es-...,
>>maxima-lang-pt-...
> 
> 
> the way i'd like to see this is to package all of the stuff
> that is now in the maxima rpm with the documentation
> for one language. (i.e. do not separate the documentation
> from the other stuff.) agreed?
> 

It depends on on the English documentation above.
If (1) then English documentation (and all other
English language specific things) resides in main maxima
rpm package.  In this scheme main maxima package remains
virtually unchanged (compared to current maxima 5.9.2).
Want translation to other language?
Install extra maxima-lang- package.


> 
>>I'll add item
>>
>>(4) Locale sensitive describe
> 
> 
> i guess it is necessary for cl-info to look in the appropriate
> directory for the info files.
> is there anything more to it than that?

Right.

>>>not sure if creation of pdf's will succeed in this scheme.
>>>i'm inclined to go ahead without pdf's if we can get info
>>>and html working.
>>
>>What is wrong with .pdf?
> 
> 
> i've had bad luck trying to convert .texi --> .pdf.
> maybe the problem can be fixed easily, that would be terrific.
> however, if it can't, i want to forge ahead anyway.
> 
Yes.


-- 
      Vadim V. Zhytnikov