Change to new key handler #30
Conversation
| # List the required TeX Live packages in a separate file to allow reuse in | ||
| # different workflows. | ||
| package_file: .github/tl_packages | ||
| - run: l3build install |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for all the comments about the action workflow: that was a quick copy and paste to have some external test runs at all and should be reviewed (also in tagpdf and pdfresources and hyperref) generally. This can be done later after a release.
| on: | ||
| push: | ||
| branches: | ||
| - "*" | ||
| - "!test*" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
* can't match /, which might appear in a branch name from forks. Perhaps you want ** to match / too here. See latex3/latex3@62c5afe and related GitHub Actions doc.
And, need pull_request event here?
| on: | |
| push: | |
| branches: | |
| - "*" | |
| - "!test*" | |
| on: | |
| push: | |
| branches: | |
| - "**" | |
| - "!test**" | |
| pull_request: |
| - run: l3build install | ||
| - run: l3build check | ||
| - name: Archive failed test output | ||
| if: ${{ always() }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe
| if: ${{ always() }} | |
| if: ${{ failure() }} |
| outputs: | ||
| cache_key: ${{ steps.texlive.outputs.cache_key }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Output cache_key is never used (and there's no step named texlive in current workflow).
| outputs: | |
| cache_key: ${{ steps.texlive.outputs.cache_key }} |
.github/tl_packages
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Aren't a lot of these dependencies of other installs, so don't need to be listed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, I simply copied a list from tagpdf (I think). That should be cleaned up.
xcolor.dtx
Outdated
| \IfFormatAtLeastTF{2022/06/01}{}{\RequirePackageWithOptions{xcolor-2022-06-12}} | ||
| \IfFormatAtLeastTF{2022/06/01}{}{\endinput} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couldn't this be one conditional with the payload in two lines?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think not, at least the newline wouldn't count, wouldn't it? I think it is safer to have this in two commands.
| ,xcdraw .code = {\def\XC@@xcd@{1}} | ||
| ,xcdraw .usage = load %TODO check | ||
| ,noxcdraw .code = {\def\XC@@xcd@{-1}} | ||
| ,noxcdraw .usage = load %TODO check | ||
| ,fixinclude .code = {\def\XC@@xcf@{1}} | ||
| ,fixinclude .usage = load %TODO check | ||
| ,prologue .code = {\def\XC@@xcp@{1}} | ||
| ,prologue .usage = load %TODO check | ||
| % \end{macrocode} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we really need to do anything for any of these today?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know (thats why there is a todo everywhere), but I think that should be discussed with the next version and not now.
This mainly switch to the new key handler and fixes a number of smaller issue, see changelog.