From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: On being web-friendly and why info must die Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 17:30:25 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <5484FF31.5010808@cs.ucla.edu> References: <20141205123549.GA29331@thyrsus.com> <2815659.zRQ0WWWeRr@descartes> <20141205175810.GD3120@thyrsus.com> <87lhmlncb1.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <20141205193643.GB5067@thyrsus.com> <87tx19rd1b.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20141205215138.GF7784@thyrsus.com> <54823617.4000406@cs.ucla.edu> <83k325195l.fsf@gnu.org> <5482D94B.2070102@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1418002271 28124 80.91.229.3 (8 Dec 2014 01:31:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 01:31:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: esr@thyrsus.com, Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 08 02:31:04 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XxnAF-0002m7-Eo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 02:31:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59750 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxnAE-0000oC-Ud for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 20:31:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47272) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XxnA4-0000o1-BC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 20:30:59 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xxn9w-0006AV-Nj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 20:30:52 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.62]:46627) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xxn9o-00068S-Ah; Sun, 07 Dec 2014 20:30:36 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2273A60007; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 17:30:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yU-3D0qTthJb; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 17:30:26 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (pool-71-177-17-123.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.177.17.123]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0680D39E8018; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 17:30:26 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.62 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:179344 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Anyway, no matter what the reason for not upgrading, in the meantime we're >> >stuck with old-technology Texinfo, and this is partly why it might be a good >> >idea to think about changing. > FWIW, while I don't hold Texinfo very dearly in my heart, I have some > real problems with labeling it as nothing else than "old-technology". By "old-technology Texinfo" I merely meant Texinfo 4 and earlier; I didn't mean to imply that Texinfo is inherently old-technology. Texinfo 5 uses newer technology and supports Unicode characters etc., but is wwwwaaaaayyyyyyy toooo ssllloooooowwww, so slow that it routinely hinders me (and no doubt others) from improving the Emacs documentation. Although I and others have reported the performance bug to the Texinfo maintainers, they've made it clear that the problem is not likely to be fixed any time soon. So, right now we're stuck between the rock of Texinfo 4 and the hard place of Texinfo 5, and this is an argument for switching to some other format.