dwb : groff replacement proposal

[Erik Cederstrand]

Den 30/06/2010 kl. 22.01 skrev Tim Kientzle:
> 
> As many have pointed out, "replacing groff" is certainly
> not a priority for the project.  Our current groff works,
> works reasonably well, and is likely to meet our
> needs for at least another decade (unlike C or C++,
> nroff functionality is not a moving target).
> 
> But more importantly "correct man-page rendering" is actually
> pretty hard.  The issue is not the manpages in the
> FreeBSD base---we can and should clean those up
> and experimentally rendering them with other tools is
> a good way to verify them.  The problem comes with third-party
> manpages, including those installed by ports.  Either the
> in-base replacement is pretty much bug-for-bug compatible
> with groff or else everyone will have to install groff anyway,
> which defeats most of the point of replacing groff in base.
> 
> That said, if someone has tested an alternative to ensure that
> it provides the same quality output as groff across a wide swathe
> of base and ports-installed manpages, and there are other real
> advantages (license, size, features, complexity), then I think it's worth
> considering.

Thanks. Just the clarification I was looking for.

Erik