@cfr After posting the question, I realized I had phrased it poorly, and that you, understanding the reason behind my question, unintentionally answered the question I hadn't actually asked. I hope I explained that clearly enough :)
@cfr Only if you're comfortable with it — I'm not trying to push you into anything :) I liked that answer because it was clear and expanded on the topic well. I found other responses too complex for the average person to understand :/
@cfr Good question
Perhaps the information is available, but it's not structured well enough to suit my frontend needs.
@EmanueleNardi mostly it is not really there. as somebody pointed out earlier (@mickep? sorry, can't remember), an unmaintained package doesn't tend to get its maintenance status updated because, well, that's an act of maintenance. and sometimes people flat out refuse to update or fix packages. failing to reply is a more popular strategy, but it is not the only one. there's also agreeing to fix it and leaving it at that. (this needn't be intentional, of course.) etc. etc.
does anybody know how to persuade checkcites to work with Biber? it works flawlessly with BibTeX, but my attempts to use it with Biber so far failed miserably. not sure if it is acceptable to ping the relevant people or not?
@yo' @PauloCereda Based on the reoccurring questions on the main site, it seems your users don't necessarily understand that your fast mode will hide images. Have you considered renaming it to something like "Fast [draft], no images"?
@samcarter They could pull a small and simple vector drawn duck as a placeholder. Then it could be called "Fast with a duck", even if @DavidCarlisle would probably insist that one cannot fast with a duck...
@PauloCereda ah. well, I probably shouldn't use it. but it is too convenient when you have many .bib files .... I did not realise it wrote the .bcf differently in that case. sorry.
