From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roel Janssen Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add texmaker. Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 20:12:35 +0200 Message-ID: <877fekwsmk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87posdzltg.fsf@gnu.org> <20160523175950.GB18979@debian-netbook> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55378) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b4uLE-0007Yr-Vk for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 23 May 2016 14:12:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b4uLC-0001iu-9O for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 23 May 2016 14:12:36 -0400 In-reply-to: <20160523175950.GB18979@debian-netbook> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Efraim Flashner Cc: Guix-devel Efraim Flashner writes: > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 01:59:07AM +0200, Roel Janssen wrote: >> Dear Guix, >> >> For the lack of a better place, I created a new file for texmaker. >> Maybe we should consider moving all LaTeX-related stuff into latex.scm. >> >> Here's a patch for Texmaker -- a decent LaTeX editor for the non-Emacs >> users ;-). > > You mean you don't just use vim? ;P Heh :P > It built perfectly for me and opened nicely too. I think it does make > sense to stick a bunch of LaTeX stuff into a dedicated file, but I'm not > seeing a lot ATM. Would sticking it in texlive make sense? Perhaps, but it's not specific to Texlive. You could even use it without having a LaTeX distribution installed to have syntax highlighting for tex files (provided you're not using Emacs for this purpose..). Therefore I don't think it would fit into texlive, but I don't have any strong feelings about this, so, what do you think? Should I add it to texlive instead? Thanks for your time and effort. Kind regards, Roel Janssen