On Tuesday 26 August 2014 18:43:22 Lennart Poettering wrote: > Honestly, I kinda like the pragmatism on Fedora, so far, that there's > no need to split up packages into a myriad of mini packges. And I > think that texlive packaging is an absolute disaster, where things are > split up to the maximum possible (> 20% of the packages I have on my > machine now are texlive packages, just because i use latex beamer from > time to time...) This is an argument that I have seen repetitively in this list. In my point of view the texlive split is similar to the perl-* or python-* packages. In this case texlive is a meta-package (distribution) that has most of the (la)tex packages that can be shipped in Fedora. To propose just a few texlive packages is similar to to have a few meta-packages called perl-extras or python-extras, with python-full, or perl-network. If this scheme does not make sense to python, or perl, or any other language why does it makes sense to apply it to latex packages? -- José Abílio -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
