Re: [Groff] [PATCH] groff_tmac(5): Discuss stripping macros.

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi Branden,

> > Or don't add the dependency that needs maintaining?
>
> Huh.  I'd make the "doesn't need maintaining" argument to support what
> I already have, not your revision.

It does need maintaining, despite all the disclaimers in advance to it
being out of date, because there's little point to it being a complete
list otherwise.  An editor will see the list, check if it's still up to
date, and maintain it.

> > I've always understood it was a contraction of `GNU troff', and roff
> > was in no way a direct influence on its name or behaviour;  troff
> > and nroff were copied.
>
> The existing groff documentation is largely consistent in referring to
> "roff" as the language,

I'm talking specifically about the source of the word "groff", not all
the uses of the word roff that litter.  CSTR 54 doesn't mention `roff'
IIRC, e.g. to refer to the language.  GNU groff wasn't an FSF
implementation of roff, but troff, etc.  Perhaps it's Bernd coinage.

-- 
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy