Re: lenny release goals and the tetex->texlive transition

[Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner@web.de>]

On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 21:24 +0100, Frank Küster wrote:

> There are a couple of possible schemes and timelines to achieve this:
>    1. With some warning in advance, drop the teTeX packages completely, see
>       what happens and deal with the mess
>    2. Make the teTeX packages transitional packages, see what happens and deal
>       with the (much smaller) mess

Just a quick question: A transitional package would be one that is
basically empty but depends on a suitable set of texlive-* packages,
right? Then the question arises whether these packages are mainly meant
for transition of the users, or if it would still be ok to use them as
(build-)dependency.

I could imagine sort of a mixture of 1. and 2.: make tetex-* packages
depend on 'texlive'. These transitional packages would be used to update
the users and to aid the transition, but using them as (build-)
dependency would be a bug.

* sensible for users who do the etch->lenny update; they want a TeX
  system, they get one; somehow the users should be informed that they
  might have to select additional packages

* will probably work for many packages that (build-)depend on tetex 
  => smaller set of packages to select from for the 'real' (build-)
     dependencies 

* there will be some mess with (build-)dependencies where 'texlive' is
  not enough; I hope it is closer to 2. than to 1., but of course I am
  not sure

Comments?

cheerio
ralf