mpg at elzevir.fr
Wed Jan 20 19:22:31 CET 2010
Khaled Hosny a écrit :
> I think the splitting is a good idea,
I'm glad you approve. Btw, I've had very few time to work on it recently, but I
plan to be quite active on it in the weeks coming.
> I'd like to move luaextra to
> luatexbase too (unless stability is a concern, then it should live in
> its own package),
I was thinking about it too, and I would prefer a separate package, so that in
the long run luatexbase can become very stable.
> and kill luatextra completely and move document
> specific parts to xltxtra. I think unifying XeTeX and LuaTeX specific
> packages would allow smoother user experience, and better
In the long run, it's probably a good idea, but I'm afraid it's a bit too early
to do this. For example, the version of fontspec supporting LuaTeX is not
release to CTAN, hence widely tested, yet, unless I'm mistaken.
I think (quite strongly) that we should avoid anticipating to much, so that we
(and users) can build confidence in the lualatex packages. and more generally
LaTeX on LuaTeX. IMO, XeLaTeX is quite more mature right now.
> The name might be subobtimal, may be we can rename
> xltxtra to ultxtra (u for Unicode), or even get a better name (I always
> mistype xltxtra!) and make xltxtra.sty a small wrapper for backward
> compatibility. Will, what do you think?
While talking names, I'm always troubled that luaextra and luatextra have so
similar names (only one letter difference, and similar pronouncation). I was
thinking about renaming luaTextra to lltxtra, since it's a xltxtra but for
luatex. Arguably, it's also only one letter different from an existing package,
but since you can't pronouce either name, the letter is more prominent (and this
similarity makes a lot of sense since the packages may be merged later).
More information about the lualatex-dev