Re: Packaging "feynmf" LaTeX macros: some questions about new TeX policy
Norbert Preining wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
>>Should I CC Norbert specifically about this [asking him to remove feynmf
>>from texlive-metapost], or will he notice it on this list?
>
> No, I notice. I guess it is too late for checking all this for the first
> upload to experimenta, but on my agenda is the following: As soon as
> texlive is in debian (experimental or unstable) and the big waves of
> trillions of bugs are gone, I want to go through the tex packages in
> debian and check wether they are compatible with texlive *and* provide
> superior functionality (like with cm-super, which provides X11 fonts,
> too). In this case I normally blacklist a package from texlive and
> depend instead on the the respective package in debian.
Ah, OK. What if the functionality is not superior, but only identical?
FeynMF hasn't been updated upstream since 1996 so I imagine that the
version in TeX Live is exactly the same as what's on CTAN. I think it's
certainly worth packaging separately just for teTeX users, but in this
situation do you prefer to also keep it packaged within the TeX Live
tree? (I am perfectly OK with this, and I don't want to ask you to take
FeynMF out of TeX Live if it would require a non-trivial amount of effort.)
best regards,
--
Kevin B. McCarty <kmccarty@princeton.edu> Physics Department
WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University
GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544
Reply to: