UTF-8 by default?

[Joel Dahl]

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 09:08:41PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 08:38:14PM +0200, Joel Dahl wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 04:07:41PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:47:45AM -0230, Jonathan Anderson wrote:
> > > > On 20 Jul 2016, at 9:13, Tim Čas wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > So, without further ado:
> > > > > 1) What are the reasons that UTF-8 isn't the default yet?
> > > > > 2) Would it be possible to make this the default in 11.0? What about
> > > > > 12.0?
> > > > > 3) Assuming an effort is started towards making UTF-8 the default,
> > > > > what changes would be required?
> > > > 
> > > > At least according to one of my students (who makes more extensive use of
> > > > i18n than I do), enabling UTF-8 by default is pretty straightforward:
> > > > 
> > > > https://github.com/musec/freebsd/wiki/Common-setup#utf-8-support
> > > 
> > > the LC_COLLATE=C is not needed anymore with freebsd 11+
> > > > 
> > > > If there's anything missing there, I'd love to hear about it.
> > > > 
> > >   - unicode support in our old groff is pretty bad, I plan to replace it with
> > >     heirloom-doctools which does handle unicode propertly (as far I have tested
> > >     at least)
> > 
> > I haven't really been paying attention lately so things might have changed,
> > but why can't we just remove groff now? We have mdocml, and for people that
> > really need the groff functionality can just install it or heirloom-doctools
> > from ports. The initial plan was to remove groff after we imported mdocml, but
> > it was never removed and I lost interest, so again, things might have changed
> > since then.
> 
> We have roff documentation in based, plus a lot of people argues that not havin
> a roff toolchain in base is an issue for them.

What is the issue? I tried to find some clues in the mailing list archive, but
my google skills are obviously weak. When we discussed this (mainly uqs@ and
me) 4 years ago the goal was to move the old roff'ed papers to the doc/
repo. I didn't see any objections when it was suggested on the doc/www mailing
lists back in 2013. There is even an old pr about it, 178730.

-- 
Joel