Discussion:
Upcoming changes in biblatex 3.11
(too old to reply)
Moewe
2018-02-03 17:57:59 UTC
Permalink
The next release of biblatex (that would be 3.11) is currently being
worked on and hopefully going to be released in the not-so-distant future.

There are going to be a few changes on the surface and a few more under
the hood. A few of the changes are strictly speaking backwards
incompatible and the changes under the hood are to critical
infrastructure, so we would appreciate a bit of beta testing, feedback
and general comments on the impact of those changes.

The list of changes can be found on the project Wiki on GitHub
(https://github.com/plk/biblatex/wiki) and the CHANGES.md file.

You can get the dev version by pulling the dev branch from git
(https://github.com/plk/biblatex) in which case you will have to run an
install script. Alternatively, you can download the development version
of biblatex 3.11 from SourceForge
(https://sourceforge.net/projects/biblatex/files/) in which case no
install script is required.
There is also going to be a corresponding Biber version
(https://sourceforge.net/projects/biblatex-biber/files/biblatex-biber/),
but for biblatex testing Biber 2.11 dev is not strictly required, so if
you would rather stay clear of a dev version of the Biber binary you can
still test biblatex.

Issues and feedback can be logged at the GitHub bugtracker:
https://github.com/plk/biblatex/issues
Maïeul
2018-02-04 20:55:53 UTC
Permalink
Dear Moweve,

I have no time to test all my file, but I have looked on the changes
list. Globally, for the package I maintain, I don't see what could be
problematic. The most problematic would have been
biblatex-source-division and biblatex-true-citepages-omit as they work
with postnote fields, and I did'nt see any problem (but I see a
historical problem in one of these public).

May I suggest you to create a list for biblatex-package/style
devellopers/users, where you could send this type of message, as I hace
done with reledmac?

Best regards, and thank for your worok

Maïeul
--
Maïeul Rouquette
http://geekographie.maieul.net/-LaTeX-
Maïeul
2018-02-04 21:05:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Maïeul
Dear Moweve,
I have no time to test all my file, but I have looked on the changes
list. Globally, for the package I maintain, I don't see what could be
problematic. The most problematic would have been
biblatex-source-division and biblatex-true-citepages-omit as they work
with postnote fields, and I did'nt see any problem (but I see a
historical problem in one of these public).
May I suggest you to create a list for biblatex-package/style
devellopers/users, where you could send this type of message, as I hace
done with reledmac?
Best regards, and thank for your worok
Maïeul
ps : I tried to send you directly the email, but I was wrong (mailbox
unavailable)
--
Maïeul Rouquette
http://geekographie.maieul.net/-LaTeX-
Moewe
2018-02-05 11:38:12 UTC
Permalink
Thank you for your reply, Maïeul.

At the moment the central place for announcement and discussions about
biblatex is at GitHub. We have started using the Wiki to copy the
announcement of relevant changes that are merged into dev from
CHANGES.md. But maybe we should think about setting up a mailing list,
that means additional overhead and even more channels to keep up to date
and posted, though. I think PLK thought about a mailing list as well,
but the idea got nowhere back then, not sure why. Maybe the demand was
not there?

At the moment the advice to style developers is to keep an eye on
CHANGES.md and the Wiki on GitHub (https://github.com/plk/biblatex/wiki).

PS: I'm new to usenet news groups and it took me a bit to get things
running, so I can't be sure I didn't mess anything up with my mail
address that prevents you from replying, sorry for that.
Post by Maïeul
Post by Maïeul
Dear Moweve,
I have no time to test all my file, but I have looked on the changes
list. Globally, for the package I maintain, I don't see what could be
problematic. The most problematic would have been
biblatex-source-division and biblatex-true-citepages-omit as they work
with postnote fields, and I did'nt see any problem (but I see a
historical problem in one of these public).
May I suggest you to create a list for biblatex-package/style
devellopers/users, where you could send this type of message, as I hace
done with reledmac?
Best regards, and thank for your worok
Maïeul
ps : I tried to send you directly the email, but I was wrong (mailbox
unavailable)
Juergen Fenn
2018-02-05 17:58:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Moewe
At the moment the central place for announcement and discussions about
biblatex is at GitHub. We have started using the Wiki to copy the
announcement of relevant changes that are merged into dev from
CHANGES.md. But maybe we should think about setting up a mailing list,
that means additional overhead and even more channels to keep up to date
and posted, though. I think PLK thought about a mailing list as well,
but the idea got nowhere back then, not sure why. Maybe the demand was
not there?
I gather those channels already exist, viz. c.t.t. and texhax, maybe
also Stackexchange. This is where you will find most TeX users, while
GitHub is a place I will probably never go to for discussing things. A
rather strange platform, hard to understand and far away from my
everyday routine.

Regards,
Jürgen.
Peter Flynn
2018-02-05 20:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Juergen Fenn
Post by Moewe
At the moment the central place for announcement and discussions
about biblatex is at GitHub. We have started using the Wiki to copy
the announcement of relevant changes that are merged into dev from
CHANGES.md. But maybe we should think about setting up a mailing
list, that means additional overhead and even more channels to keep
up to date and posted, though. I think PLK thought about a mailing
list as well, but the idea got nowhere back then, not sure why.
Maybe the demand was not there?
Possibly. But there are three fundamental points often missed:

1. It's a matter of personal preference: some people prefer certain
platforms over others, and believe their preference is always better;

2. With email and Usenet, using a client, stuff arrives automatically.
With a web-based system, you have to consciously go and visit it;

3. Some platforms are read-only: they are only good for announcements.
Other platforms are read/write (wikis, email, Usenet) and they are
good for discussions (wikis have too big a learning curve;
stackexchange has got it about right).
Post by Juergen Fenn
I gather those channels already exist, viz. c.t.t. and texhax, maybe
also Stackexchange. This is where you will find most TeX users, while
GitHub is a place I will probably never go to for discussing things. A
rather strange platform, hard to understand and far away from my
everyday routine.
I agree 100% about GitHub. It's very useful for shared code development,
but it is forbiddingly difficult to use. It makes a very poor platform
for the announcement and discussion of software *by people who only use
the package in developing other stuff*. It may make a very good platform
for discussion by the developers of the package itself; I don't use it
for that.

Basically, if you want to reach the biggest number of people who *use*
packages in development, I would guess c.t.t is the best. But I'd be
happy to be proved wrong.

///Peter
Peter Wilson
2018-02-05 20:56:29 UTC
Permalink
Usage of c.t.t seems to have fallen by the wayside. I still subscribe
but there seems to be little there except for announcements about
package uploads/changes. It seems to have been overtaken by
StackExchange (at least for asking questions) but not as a place to
discuss potential changes/enhancements to LaTeX packages. (I still find
StackExchange a steep learning curve; perhaps it's because I have no
grandchildren nearby to keep me up to date;-).

Peter W. [GOM]
Post by Peter Flynn
Post by Juergen Fenn
Post by Moewe
At the moment the central place for announcement and discussions
about biblatex is at GitHub. We have started using the Wiki to copy
the announcement of relevant changes that are merged into dev from
CHANGES.md. But maybe we should think about setting up a mailing
list, that means additional overhead and even more channels to keep
up to date and posted, though. I think PLK thought about a mailing
list as well, but the idea got nowhere back then, not sure why.
Maybe the demand was not there?
1. It's a matter of personal preference: some people prefer certain
platforms over others, and believe their preference is always better;
2. With email and Usenet, using a client, stuff arrives automatically.
With a web-based system, you have to consciously go and visit it;
3. Some platforms are read-only: they are only good for announcements.
Other platforms are read/write (wikis, email, Usenet) and they are
good for discussions (wikis have too big a learning curve;
stackexchange has got it about right).
Post by Juergen Fenn
I gather those channels already exist, viz. c.t.t. and texhax, maybe
also Stackexchange. This is where you will find most TeX users, while
GitHub is a place I will probably never go to for discussing things. A
rather strange platform, hard to understand and far away from my
everyday routine.
I agree 100% about GitHub. It's very useful for shared code development,
but it is forbiddingly difficult to use. It makes a very poor platform
for the announcement and discussion of software *by people who only use
the package in developing other stuff*. It may make a very good platform
for discussion by the developers of the package itself; I don't use it
for that.
Basically, if you want to reach the biggest number of people who *use*
packages in development, I would guess c.t.t is the best. But I'd be
happy to be proved wrong.
///Peter
Peter Flynn
2018-02-06 18:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Wilson
Usage of c.t.t seems to have fallen by the wayside. I still subscribe
but there seems to be little there except for announcements about
package uploads/changes.
That's one of its most useful features, IMHO. But it's a different
audience, which is why I still ask some questions there.
Post by Peter Wilson
It seems to have been overtaken by
StackExchange (at least for asking questions) but not as a place to
discuss potential changes/enhancements to LaTeX packages.
Yes, for questions, SE is also excellent, but it's not a discussion
forum. Web forums are *horrible* for group discussions: email provides
much better facilities.
Post by Peter Wilson
(I still find
StackExchange a steep learning curve; perhaps it's because I have no
grandchildren nearby to keep me up to date;-).
SE has some odd quirks in the interface which will probably turn out to
be the pet features of someone or other :-) They still haven't quite
grokked the idea of obviousness.

There is also a recurring habit of the moderators marking a question as
off-topic when it very clearly is right on-topic. I think they are very
dedicated and work far too hard, so they are missing the clues.

///Peter

Axel Berger
2018-02-06 14:21:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flynn
With a web-based system, you have to consciously go and visit it;
That's what RSS-feeds are for.
Post by Peter Flynn
(wikis have too big a learning curve;
stackexchange has got it about right).
I'd go so far to claim the direct opposite. Wiki is just a bit of well
documeted syntax, easily learnt. Stackexchange is a terrible video quest
where you can spend whole afternoons trying to find hidden treasure.
--
/¯\ No | Dipl.-Ing. F. Axel Berger Tel: +49/ 221/ 7771 8067
\ / HTML | Roald-Amundsen-Straße 2a Fax: +49/ 221/ 7771 8069
 X in | D-50829 Köln-Ossendorf http://berger-odenthal.de
/ \ Mail | -- No unannounced, large, binary attachments, please! --
Maïeul
2018-02-06 15:26:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Axel Berger
Post by Peter Flynn
With a web-based system, you have to consciously go and visit it;
That's what RSS-feeds are for.
Yes, but there is no feed on github wiki (or at Least, i don't see it)
--
Maïeul Rouquette
http://geekographie.maieul.net/-LaTeX-
Loading...