Document .dtx vs. .cls

[koppor]

This template uses the .dtx procedure to generate the files such as lni.cls. PRs, however, touch the files directly (e.g., #104). In case such a PR is merged, the template distribution process undoes the changes.

Example:

-  \vskip -27pt% Abstand vor dem Titel
+  \vskip -24pt% Abstand vor dem Titel

We should document explain how the whole system works (https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/344530/9075; https://www.texdev.net/tags/#dtx), put make it optional to contributors. After a PR, the maintainers have to adapt the .dtx.

Alternatively, we could remove the generated files from the .dtx. This, however, would make the whole package inconsistent with "typical" .dtx usage.

CC @csware

[sieversMartin]

If we stick to the dtx-approach, this should be the file to be edited. The CONTRIBUTING.md should clearly state this IMHO.
Maybe we could then establish a workflow/check for a pull request, which tests for changes in the dtx file, calls latex lni.ins and then merges the files. Is that even possible @koppor?

[koppor]

Sure, we can do a merge.

And then manually "backporting" to .dtx?

[sieversMartin]

Well, no. I thought of getting contributors to only modify the dtx file :-)