Re: Release Goal Proposal: texlive-transition
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 09:02:47AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 13:30 +0200, Florent Rougon wrote:
> > [Trying to reply for Frank, since he's on vacation...]
> > Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > > This particular problem only exists because you're providing tetex-bin and
> > > tetex-extra packages that don't have the same semantics as previous
> > > versions.
> > As Frank explained, it is impossible to provide "packages that don't have
> > the same semantics as previous versions". The only possible thing, since
> > teTeX is removed, is to provide "packages that provide a superset of the
> > functionality provided by tetex-* packages when teTeX was still in the
> > archive."
> I think the problem is that the new packages aren't a superset; you
> can't reliably put in the new package and expect all the previously
> working bits to still keep working.
Rather, the problem is that Frank's comments implied this was *not* a goal
of the TeX team.
If it is, then the concerns about the user experience go away... as does any
urgency of trying to eliminate the references to these packages in the rest
of the archive, since the dependencies will be correctly satisfiable through
lenny and will not significantly interfere with the upgrade path post-lenny.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.