[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: texlive-basic_2005-1_i386.changes REJECTED

Le lundi 28 novembre 2005 à 08:07 +0100, Norbert Preining a écrit :
> > Im also not really happy with the current packaging, starting with the too
> > heavy split of (source) packages.
> Ok, this can be dealt with. I thought it would be better to have a
> strict relation between source and bin packages, but where it was not
> possible.

I'd go further, by asking why there must be so many binary packages. Of
course, granularity is good, but too much granularity only means
confusion. When I install a TeX system, I want a working environment
without wondering if I need to install tex-foo or tex-bar. That's why
I'm happy with the current naming scheme of tetex. A few packages, with
clear names, and no one is lost.

I know you're going to tell me there will be metapackages, and that I
should just use them. But it also means even more packages, which aren't
easily distinguishable from others. I've seen users not understanding
why installing gnome-session doesn't bring a complete, working, GNOME
"session", and I'm afraid your naming scheme will lead to similar

 .''`.           Josselin Mouette        /\./\
: :' :           josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org
`. `'                        joss@debian.org
  `-  Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: