Bug#108936: passivetex: duplicate wnpp
> > You both seem to have something not far from working, maybe you can
> > look at each others package...
> >
> > Jochen 'still eager to try a package'
> >
> Mark appears to be missing in action.
Not any more. I'm back for the long haul. (Got sidelined by a nasty
divorce.)
I'm definitely in the loop now, but it'll take me at least a week to
catch up. I've got some XML policy stuff and docbook packages to
develop and maintain.
> (Are you out there Mark?)
Yep.
> The immediate project I needed passivetex for got cancelled so I
> have not looked at it since. But I will probably do so again soon
> and maybe upload it myself. My big problem is I don't really know
> too much about how TeX is supposed to work which is why I was hoping
> someone more knowledgeable would take it over.
I know just enough about TeX and regularly work with two guys who know
TeX quite well: Adam DiCarlo and Norm Walsh. I've also got a pledge
from Sebastian Rahtz (upstream developer) for help in packaging it, so
I've do have access to the necessary resources. I just haven't had the
time until now. I'll talk with Sebastian and try to get something
working over the weekend or by early next week.
Passivetex is really one of the most fundamental (free) tools in the
world of XSL processing. I can't stress enough how important it is to
get it all working. The more people finding bugs, the sooner we can
all get off the jade/dsssl addiction when it comes to generating pdf
output.
So, um, yeah, I'm back in the game and am taking it quite seriously.
Thanks for your patience, all. Much appreciated.
Cheers,
Mark
> BTW these aren't really duplicates. One is an ITP (intent To Package) and
> the other is an RFP (Request For Package--with a package thrown in. :)
_____________________________________
Mark Johnson <mark@duke.edu>
Debian SGML <mrj@debian.org>
Home Page: <http://dulug.duke.edu/~mark/>
GPG fp: 50DF A22D 5119 3485 E9E4 89B2 BCBC B2C8 2BE2 FE81
Reply to: