Re: what should be installed in the default case?

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   texi2html is basically integrated in texinfo. Right now I haven't
   changed anything in what was installed, so the C-makeinfo and
   texi2html are installed.

   texi2html may be installed under 3 names: texi2html, makeinfo and
   texi2any. As makeinfo, it is fully compatible with C-makeinfo, as
   texi2any, the default output is raw text and it accepts more
   options, it is meant to be output format independent.

I'm not sure I understand, the default format for makeinfo has been
Info, and it is a specific format with a bunch of quirks.  Has this
been changed?  I hope not, this would be disastrous.

   I think that texi2html should not be installed as long as it is
   distributed in a separate tarball. Now there could be an
   installation target that installs it as a link to the installed
   script.

I think that installing texi2html is fine when installing texinfo.  If
the goal is to replace the old makeinfo, then the old makeinfo should
be overwritten as part of `make install'; if they are backwards
compatible for the most part it will not cause much headaches.

   * should texi2any be installed? Or should makeinfo have the 
     texi2any options added and still be used as the converter
     of choice?
   * if texi2any is installed
      - should the makeinfo perl replace the C-makeinfo? If 
        yes should C-makeinfo still be installed under a different 
        name?
      - should texi2any be advertized as the tool to use instead
        of makeinfo?

I prefer `makeinfo' since it is descriptive, and it also has many
years of usage.  `texi2any' isn't very descriptive at all, will there
be a texi2info, texi2text, etc as well?