From blamario at ciktel.net  Mon Oct 30 15:39:47 2017
From: blamario at ciktel.net (=?UTF-8?Q?Mario_Bla=c5=beevi=c4=87?=)
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:39:47 -0400
Subject: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?
In-Reply-To: <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
References: <CAHYVw0wGqsFqovjdSA4k=P_GNQjnr3PGLNk_H68ecsUoAo4cmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFsArvFwN_HeTpoYUHm0WTt94LO3kfuUL_i9tYwy+jRK0S3Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUvnf=GkKbSTvV9ZGL7jO8TRgDXG45_dwMnLqF=oogWkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <871sni1ibv.fsf@gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jU7dMeoQ3hS-2L5TqTw321SdEty-uzWk-F0pXbwm+Lf_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUVy8RZUYHrT3cefSQbrcBo8yENUMzwoiMop72r2fA8wQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8ff3e366-d7ab-70e1-7421-59de241fb255@ciktel.net>

On 2017-09-09 09:40 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
> documentation system?


Since nobody said no in the 7 weeks since, I think it's safe to assume 
yes. Can we proceed with this now?

Once the report is a part of the RFCs repository, I assume it will 
become the proper home that pull requests 
https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report/pull/3 (if also accompanied by 
an RFC).



From nicolas.wu at gmail.com  Tue Oct 31 09:28:12 2017
From: nicolas.wu at gmail.com (Nicolas Wu)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 09:28:12 +0000
Subject: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?
In-Reply-To: <8ff3e366-d7ab-70e1-7421-59de241fb255@ciktel.net>
References: <CAHYVw0wGqsFqovjdSA4k=P_GNQjnr3PGLNk_H68ecsUoAo4cmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFsArvFwN_HeTpoYUHm0WTt94LO3kfuUL_i9tYwy+jRK0S3Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUvnf=GkKbSTvV9ZGL7jO8TRgDXG45_dwMnLqF=oogWkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <871sni1ibv.fsf@gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jU7dMeoQ3hS-2L5TqTw321SdEty-uzWk-F0pXbwm+Lf_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUVy8RZUYHrT3cefSQbrcBo8yENUMzwoiMop72r2fA8wQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
 <8ff3e366-d7ab-70e1-7421-59de241fb255@ciktel.net>
Message-ID: <5F36DCF0-ACC9-47E6-8860-1D9FE95F46F9@gmail.com>

It’s a yes from me for us to be using LaTeX, but I think it might be useful to use lhs2TeX to generate the LaTeX.

lhs2TeX makes it possible for us to write literate Haskell files as the source to the Report, which in turn allows us to type-check much of the code we write, which is nice.

Best wishes,

Nick



> On 30 Oct 2017, at 15:39, Mario Blažević <blamario at ciktel.net> wrote:
> 
> On 2017-09-09 09:40 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
>> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
>> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
>> documentation system?
> 
> 
> Since nobody said no in the 7 weeks since, I think it's safe to assume yes. Can we proceed with this now?
> 
> Once the report is a part of the RFCs repository, I assume it will become the proper home that pull requests https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report/pull/3 (if also accompanied by an RFC).
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime


From mblazevic at stilo.com  Tue Oct 31 12:39:31 2017
From: mblazevic at stilo.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Mario_Bla=c5=beevi=c4=87?=)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 08:39:31 -0400
Subject: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?
In-Reply-To: <5F36DCF0-ACC9-47E6-8860-1D9FE95F46F9@gmail.com>
References: <CAHYVw0wGqsFqovjdSA4k=P_GNQjnr3PGLNk_H68ecsUoAo4cmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFsArvFwN_HeTpoYUHm0WTt94LO3kfuUL_i9tYwy+jRK0S3Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUvnf=GkKbSTvV9ZGL7jO8TRgDXG45_dwMnLqF=oogWkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <871sni1ibv.fsf@gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jU7dMeoQ3hS-2L5TqTw321SdEty-uzWk-F0pXbwm+Lf_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUVy8RZUYHrT3cefSQbrcBo8yENUMzwoiMop72r2fA8wQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
 <8ff3e366-d7ab-70e1-7421-59de241fb255@ciktel.net>
 <5F36DCF0-ACC9-47E6-8860-1D9FE95F46F9@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b1c3798e-8586-8a99-7088-69abf8334063@stilo.com>

On 2017-10-31 05:28 AM, Nicolas Wu wrote:
> It’s a yes from me for us to be using LaTeX, but I think it might be useful to use lhs2TeX to generate the LaTeX.
> 
> lhs2TeX makes it possible for us to write literate Haskell files as the source to the Report, which in turn allows us to type-check much of the code we write, which is nice.
> 

	If we agree to use lhs2TeX, we can migrate the Haskell code fragments 
incrementally, after we check in the existing report. I suppose that 
would be just another RFC pull request, so feel free to submit it.


> Best wishes,
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
>> On 30 Oct 2017, at 15:39, Mario Blažević <blamario at ciktel.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 2017-09-09 09:40 AM, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:
>>> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
>>> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
>>> documentation system?
>>
>>
>> Since nobody said no in the 7 weeks since, I think it's safe to assume yes. Can we proceed with this now?
>>
>> Once the report is a part of the RFCs repository, I assume it will become the proper home that pull requests https://github.com/haskell/haskell-report/pull/3 (if also accompanied by an RFC).
>>

From doaitse at swierstra.net  Tue Oct 31 14:09:10 2017
From: doaitse at swierstra.net (Doaitse Swierstra)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:09:10 +0100
Subject: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?
In-Reply-To: <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
References: <CAHYVw0wGqsFqovjdSA4k=P_GNQjnr3PGLNk_H68ecsUoAo4cmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFsArvFwN_HeTpoYUHm0WTt94LO3kfuUL_i9tYwy+jRK0S3Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUvnf=GkKbSTvV9ZGL7jO8TRgDXG45_dwMnLqF=oogWkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <871sni1ibv.fsf@gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jU7dMeoQ3hS-2L5TqTw321SdEty-uzWk-F0pXbwm+Lf_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUVy8RZUYHrT3cefSQbrcBo8yENUMzwoiMop72r2fA8wQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <17621677-A98C-4010-8140-508B992219D7@swierstra.net>

The good thing about laTeX is that out of all the candidates it is the most likely one to still work 40 years from now,

    Doaitse



> Op 9 sep. 2017, om 15:40  heeft Herbert Valerio Riedel <hvriedel at gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hello *,
> 
> On 2017-09-08 at 00:46:52 +0200, Mario Blazevic wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> If the report was written in reStructuredText we could simply use
>>> something like the readthedocs.org service. But since it's LaTeX, we
>>> have to do a little bit more work to publishes ("deploys" in newspeak)
>>> .pdf drafts somewhere else, but it's doable.
>>> 
>>> I can take care to set it up, if it's clear what kind of CI/CD we want.
> 
>> Is the current publishing system really that difficult?
> 
> No, it's not that bad, it's just that there likely won't be a service
> that'll work out of the box with GitHub integration like readthedocs...
> 
>> To my grizzled ears, this sounds like you're fishing for a volunteer
>> to translate LaTeX to ReST. I'd actually be willing to do that, as I
>> have plenty of experience with text transformations, but I'd need a
>> buy-in from everybody.
> 
> ...but I wouldn't go as far as to suggest this is reason enough to
> translate the report into .rst
> 
> I guess I was rather trying to fish for some commitment that we want in
> fact to stay with LaTeX; I was planning to pick up where I left things
> in 2015 and clean up/refactor the TeX text and also investigate what our
> current options are to generate state-of-the-art .pdf, .html and .epub
> output. And I'd like to avoid this resulting a waste of effort in case
> we decide to move away from LaTeX in the foreseeable future...
> 
> Long story short, is everyone ok to stay with (La)TeX, or is there some
> compelling reason that would justify migrating to a different
> documentation system?
> 
> -- hvr
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-prime mailing list
> Haskell-prime at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime


From johnw at newartisans.com  Tue Oct 31 14:37:02 2017
From: johnw at newartisans.com (John Wiegley)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 07:37:02 -0700
Subject: Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?
In-Reply-To: <17621677-A98C-4010-8140-508B992219D7@swierstra.net> (Doaitse
 Swierstra's message of "Tue, 31 Oct 2017 15:09:10 +0100")
References: <CAHYVw0wGqsFqovjdSA4k=P_GNQjnr3PGLNk_H68ecsUoAo4cmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFsArvFwN_HeTpoYUHm0WTt94LO3kfuUL_i9tYwy+jRK0S3Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUvnf=GkKbSTvV9ZGL7jO8TRgDXG45_dwMnLqF=oogWkA@mail.gmail.com>
 <871sni1ibv.fsf@gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jU7dMeoQ3hS-2L5TqTw321SdEty-uzWk-F0pXbwm+Lf_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP-J8jUVy8RZUYHrT3cefSQbrcBo8yENUMzwoiMop72r2fA8wQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <87y3poat2f.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
 <17621677-A98C-4010-8140-508B992219D7@swierstra.net>
Message-ID: <m2zi87fkoh.fsf@newartisans.com>

>>>>> "DS" == Doaitse Swierstra <doaitse at swierstra.net> writes:

SD> The good thing about laTeX is that out of all the candidates it is the
SD> most likely one to still work 40 years from now,

+1 from me for LaTeX as well.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2