groff 1.23.0 stability (was: using the TQ macro)

["G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 917 bytes --]

Hi Alex,

At 2023-10-25T17:08:19+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> BTW, I just checked and Gentoo still doesn't consider 1.23.0 stable
> enough <https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/sys-apps/groff>.  :|

I don't understand that claim.  1.23.x is as stable as it can be; there
have been no point releases.  Its behavior is not changing based on the
calendar.  I have to assume that there are either changes since 1.22.4
documented in NEWS (and if not, that's probably a bug) that they're
concerned about, or they're worried the broader community hasn't gotten
enough exposure to it yet.  repology.org has been sitting at 64
instances of groff 1.23.0 for weeks now; I think pretty much everyone
who's going to adopt it has done so by now.

CCing Sam James (the only Gentoo developer I know by name, because he's
been active some of the same places I have been) in case he can throw
some light on this.

Regards,
Branden

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]