When I see command name "rst2latex", I understand immediately, that it
takes RST-code and outputs LaTeX-code. It just follows common naming
convention of command line Unix-programs. It is so common that even
Jargon File knows about it:

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/0/infix-2.html

And that's fine: rst2latex really works exactly as its name suggests.

Then comes command line program called "rst2xetex". That name
suggests, it takes RST-code as its input and outputs Plain TeX -code
suitable for TeX-engine called XeTeX. Bzzz! Wrong! It's man page says:

rst2xetex - convert reST documents to XeLateX

What the hell? If it outputs LaTeX-code suitable for XeLaTeX, why its
name is "rst2xetex" and not "rst2xelatex", then? If I write LaTeX-code
that is compiled with TeX-engine called XeTeX, then I compile it with
command xelatex, and not xetex.

That is totally stupid inconsistency. What the hell is going in the
twisted minds of developers of python-docutils? BTW who writes Plain
TeX -code, anyway, when we have LaTeX and ConTeXt?

retitle 643990 python-docutils: inconsistent names of rst2*tex scripts
forwarded 643990 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=3419937&group_id=38414&atid=422030
severity 643990 minor
tags 643990 + confirmed
thanks

* Juhapekka Tolvanen <juhtolv@iki.fi>, 2011-10-01, 16:43:

I forwarded your bug report to upstream developers.

Next time, please formulate your compliant in such a way, that I can
point them directly to the bug report without being embarrassed. Just
because you're not completely happy about the software they wrote,
doesn't mean that they don't deserve a little bit of respect.

Thanks in advance.

Take me for instance.

...

Actually, it expects LaTeX2e and a pdfTeX engine in a version not earlier
than 2005-02-04 (see [1]). On a not too old Debian rst2latex output can
be converted with either ``pdflatex`` or ``latex`` or one of the many
front ends like ``rubber`` or via any decent text editor.

[1] http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/latex.html#error-illegal-unit-px

Sorry for the confusion.
The help string does not have it: ``rst2xetex --help`` ::

  Generates XeLaTeX documents from standalone reStructuredText sources.

Just because the first one is shorter.

Like the LyX document processor ("PDF (dvips)" vs. "PDF (pdflatex)" vs
"PDF (XeTeX)"), Docutils uses short distinguishing names following the
"Zen of Python":

  practicality beats purity.

One can also use ``xetex %&latex``, ``lualatex``, ``luatex &latex`` or
one of the many available front ends to compile documents generated with
the rst2xetex script.

I agree that "latex" for "TeX with LaTeX macro package to be compiled by
the pdftex engine" vs. "xetex" for "TeX with LaTeX macro package to be
compiled by either the xetex or luatex engine" may contribute to further
confusion of the concepts of "TeX macro packages" (formats)the language"
vs. "modified TeX executables" (engines).

Also, the name does not convey that the main distinction to the "latex2e"
writer is the use of the fontenc and polyglossia packages.

But I am not sure it is worth changing this to "rst2xetelatexorlualatex" as
this breaks everything expecting the inconsistent but short name.

Günter