mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[Stephan Mucha <address@hidden>]

I wanted to test some of the new (gui) features when they first came
up, so i downloaded the cvs version and compiled on debian on my own
which worked out of the box (besides some path incompatibilities
between debian and cvs versions).

I use this version nearly daily and have not recognized a less stable
behaviour than for the 3 digit versions.

So I would like to see the 4 digit versions in unstable.


Hope this helps!

Stephan




KSK> Hi

KSK>     I am currently part of the maintenance team of texmacs in Debian. I
KSK> would like to get some feedback from Debian users using Texmacs and from
KSK> the developers of texmacs. Previously, all the 4 digit versions of 
texmacs
KSK> (ex:- 1.0.6.9) used to be uploaded to 'Debian experimental' and 3 digit
KSK> versions (ex:- 1.0.6) are uploaded to 'Debian unstable'. The idea is that
KSK> the 4 digit versions of texmacs are very unstable compared to the 3 digit
KSK> versions.

KSK>     However, texmacs has been taking a long time to release 1.0.7. 
Besides,
KSK> packages in debian experimental does not get that much tested as do
KSK> packages in debian unstable.

KSK>     So do Debian users like to see Texmacs versions such as 1.0.6.10 in
KSK> unstable? What do the developers think? Are the 4 digit versions so
KSK> immature that they fail to compile etc.,? or are they reasonably usable?

KSK> Any opinions/suggestions would be very welcome. Especially if you are a 
long
KSK> term texmacs+Debian user.

KSK> thanks
KSK> raju




___________________________________________________

  Dipl.-Ing. Stephan Mucha
  Tel.:    0341/97-33806 
  Fax:     0341/97-33809
  e-mail:  address@hidden
___________________________________________________
 
  Universität Leipzig
  Institut für Massivbau und Baustofftechnologie
  Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Nguyen Viet Tue
  Marschnerstrasse 31
  04109 Leipzig
___________________________________________________