Andrew Hawryluk wrote:
> Yes, it has all been retained (and expanded) in the new essay,
> but only the PDF version is very pretty right now.
Andrew, does that mean automated-engraving.itexi and
automated-engraving/* can be removed from the source? We should
clean that up once we're finished with
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:41:54PM -0800, Patrick Horgan wrote:
>> I saw one document issue I thought I
>> might bring up with the editors, so checked the 2.13 LM to see if it was
>> already dealt with before I bothered people with somethin
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 12:41:54PM -0800, Patrick Horgan wrote:
> I saw one document issue I thought I
> might bring up with the editors, so checked the 2.13 LM to see if it was
> already dealt with before I bothered people with something that had
> already been fixed. To my surprise, I coul
I hadn't read the LM for some time and thought it would be nice to see
how it was doing. I started reading the 2.12 version and was
wonderfully surprised by the Introduction which gives great history and
context to understand the rest. I saw one document issue I thought I
might bring up with