On 8 April 2015 at 19:40, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 8 April 2015 at 12:04, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >>>>> "MC" == Matěj Cepl <mcepl@xxxxxxx> writes: >> >> MC> Cutting up texlive monster piece by piece seems like rather lousy >> MC> idea to me. >> >> I honestly don't see why. Surely fixing some of it is better than >> fixing none of it. And fixing some of it shows us how to fix the rest >> of it. > > > I think the problem is that no one has figured out how to 'fix' a part of > it. The best anyone has come up with was a machine generated 16MB spec file. > We all keep looking at it, scratching our heads and then saying "Someone > should fix that." knowing we can't. I look at tl2pm and think "it would be fairly easy to patch that to spit out 4000 and something spec files rather than one 16 MB one". The unresolved issues are whether doing that would invalidate the previous license audit (it shouldn't really), and whether FESCO would grant a package review exception for those packages. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
