TeX 1995 July/TeX CD-ROM July 1995 (Disc 1)(Walnut Creek)(1995).ISO/tex-k/tex-k-archive.past/tex-k-archive.gz/tex-k-archive/[e-mail]_Wed Jul 13 14:28:44 1994.msg

Internet Message Format | 1994-10-11 | 2KB

Received: from mcenroe.cs.unc.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA01383
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <[e-mail]>); Thu, 14 Jul 1994 02:29:45 -0400
Received: from proteus.cs.unc.edu by mcenroe.cs.unc.edu (8.6.9/UNC_06_21_94)
    id SAA05280; Wed, 13 Jul 1994 18:28:45 -0400
Received: by proteus.cs.unc.edu (8.6.9/UNC_06_21_94)
    id SAA01824; Wed, 13 Jul 1994 18:28:44 -0400
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 1994 18:28:44 -0400
From: Rik Faith <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] (John Interrante)
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: converting to latex2e
In-Reply-To: [John Interrante <[e-mail] >] Wed 13 Jul 94 12:40:47 PDT
References: <[e-mail]>
    <[e-mail]>

On Wed 13 Jul 94 12:40:47 PDT,
   John Interrante <[e-mail] > wrote:

 > If I were you, I wouldn't bother to keep around a latex209 directory
 > in lib.tar.gz.  People who're installing a new unixtex from scratch
 > won't care about supporting latex209.  Only people who *already* have
 > latex209 might want to hang onto their latex209 files, and we can tell
 > them to move their files out of the way into a latex209 directory
 > before unpacking lib.tar.gz.

This will be painful for a lot of sites.  For example, our latex 2.09
source files are so old that I don't want to trust them.  LaTeX 2e will be
giving some sites the incentive to _finally_ upgrade old installations.  I
think that latex209 should be included during the transition period to help
with the change over.  At my site, very few people are using 2e, even in
compatibility mode, so I suspect that latex209 will live on for quite a
while.