[TUHS] Demise of TeX and groff (was: roff(7))
Larry McVoy
lm at mcvoy.com
Wed Jan 12 06:36:18 AEST 2022
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:26:12PM -0800, Jon Steinhart wrote:
> Larry McVoy writes:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:15:43PM -0800, Jon Steinhart wrote:
> > > The big thing missing from *roff from a publishing point of view is
> > > a good way to make comments and respond to them. Kind of a must-have
> > > when working with human (not text) editors.
> >
> > Source code control for the win.
>
> Well, you're correct, but not practical with human editors. I'm not
> talking about revision history, I'm talking about the ability to easily
> highlight a portion of text and comment "did you mean foo?" and so on.
> That part of the production process feedback loop is missing. Of course,
> with *roff one could mostly produce one's own stuff without needing human
> editors and a production staff.
I wrote the GUIs for BitKeeper, I could absolutely give you exactly
what you want. Really, what you are describing is our code review
system which could done done completely in a web browser but if you
needed to hack on things, you cloned it and hacked on it and pushed.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mcvoy.com/lm
More information about the TUHS
mailing list