On 17/12/2007, Jindrich Novy <jnovy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I vote for 2) generally. Considering that TeXLive is mostly a set of > collections gathered from multiple upstreams at some time, it makes > perfectly sense to separate the most frequently used bits to their own > packages and let them updated/maintained separately by their own separate > maintainers. > The ideal situation IMO would be to have only core TeX/LaTeX bits in the > base TeXLive installation and most of the collections that need to be > updated more frequently than TeXLive release cycle (~once per 2 years) > out of it. > To keep consistency with TeXLive, the main texlive/texlive-texmf > packages could Requires: bits packaged separately as soon as someone > decides to maintain it separately. That would keep the TeXLive > updated, based on users' needs even in the middle of the TeXLive > release cycle. > > Any thoughts? Seems reasonable. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
