Shall the Haskell Report remain in LaTeX?

[Mario Blažević]

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).
>>