>> The thing is: Something might happen if I'm not available, for
>> whatever reasons. It definitely *is* a high maintenance cost if a
>> single developer is responsible...
>
> But that's true of any one feature: I build you a nice template
> library to do <whatever> in <whatever situation> and you find a bug
> while I'm <on vacation>. That can always happen, we know this, we
> cope with it. How's the TeX/texinfo build any different?
There is more than a single developer who excels with Python, Scheme,
and C++ code. For Metafont and arcane TeX programming (and
`texinfo.tex` *is* arcane) the number of people who are fluent in
those programming languages is much smaller.
>> I disagree, it is *not* all about the users. There must be a
>> balance between what the developers want to do or can do, and what
>> the users expect. Promising stuff to the user, which later on
>> fails due to the lack of developer resources, is bad.
>
> Forgive me Werner, but it appears to me your own closing point is
> actually precisely about the users, isn't it?
The thing is: Jonas and Jean think that promising support for all
three TeX flavours could be a disservice in the long run in case
problems happen.
Werner
