Re: Tasks: Typesetting addition
Andreas Tille wrote am 3/19/2009 3:58 PM:
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, Jan Beyer wrote:
>
>> I would like to suggest the newly-to-Debian-added package bibus as an
>> addition to our typesetting-tasks file.
>
> Good suggestion. I just added ist to the tasks file and rerendered the
> tasks page[1].
Many thanks!
>
>> I am simply copying the packages description here:
>
> Ther's no need to copy this - the tasks page generating code just recieves
> this automatically.
It was mainly meant for your/everybodys information and to advertise my
package... ;-)
>
>> I think, it would be a worthy addition.
>
> Yes. I'm a little bit unsure whether it is reasonable to use
> kbibtex and bibus as "Suggests" and texlive-science, texlive-latex-extra
> as "Depends". This makes the former into a lower priority group.
> Would you think they are all of equal importance. This problem
> becomes in this case specific relevance because of the overlongish
> descriptions of the texlive packages (which I do not really like
> but I have no idea how to enhance this - suggestions?).
hmm, I'm not sure either. It may depend on the group of people we are
aiming at. Are they using (La)TeX or OpenOffice.org? For people, who
only use OpenOffice.org anyway, it might be useless waste of space to
have to install texlive-science and texlive-latex-extra (I suspect,
these are rather large packages, but I didn't check). I feel, it
wouldn't hurt to have at least one OpenOffice.org-compatible program in
Depends:. But if we have texlive-... in Depends: then we also should
have kbibtex or jabref (which actually is also missing) in Depends:.
Actually, there are many more such packages, which we might want to list
there (pybliographer e.g.).
A question which is somehow related to my above stated one: Do we
actually need a separate task typesetting in Debian Med or can we use
the one from Debian Science (which contains many more programs)? If we
aim at a different group of people, then, of course, yes. But what, if
the groups actually are not so different, regarding their
"typesetting-habits"?
Just some thoughts...
Best Regards,
Jan
Reply to: