Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> People who want TEX kept should create a task force and feed TEXlive
> 2008 in rawhide bit by bit, checking for each bit the licensing is ok.
> That's about the only way the burden of checking TEX can be distributed
> enough it won't depend on a couple packagers, when the amount of work is
> too much to be humanly doable by a few people alone in a realistic
> timeframe.
I don't think that makes sense:
* Modular packaging is a lot more work than monolithic packaging.
* If we import TeXlive 2008 piecemeal, we'll have a Rawhide with a broken
mix of a monolithic 2007 package and incomplete split 2008 packages.
We have to upgrade 2007 to 2008 and this should not be blocking on a license
review. No other packages get a license audit on each upgrade, I don't see
why TeXlive should be any different.
We should just upgrade TeXlive and then deal with any licensing issues if
they are found and reported. Redoing an audit at every new version is not
going to scale and nothing in our policies requires it.
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
