Bug#688041: Please confirm
Hi Everyone,
On Fr, 12 Okt 2012, Thomas Kremer wrote:
> >> Now, if you insist on keeping the debian package == Tex Live collection
> >> correspondence,
> >
> > We do not insist. We already have implemented docsplitting.
>
> Judging by his actions as well as his words, Norbert does insist.
> In his view, any change in packaging has to be done upstream.
Again wrong. What we have done here is in line with upstream TeX Live.
The installer for TeX Live allows installation *without* the doucmentation
files, so splitting some of the docs of is nothing specific.
You don't see the conceptual difference between collection splitting
and splitting a class of files (DocFiles) of packages.
> > (
> > and that includes 1. a scheme for splitting, or in other words
> > combining collections to a couple of Debian packages, and 2. a proposal
> > on how to implement and maintain that (when new fonts are added
> > frequently!)
> > )
>
> I have already proposed a solution. But maybe it was not detailed
> enough? Not that anyone would have told me...
Still you haven't provided a list of TeX Live packages that should
go into the new collection, nor a new name,.
Everything you say like:
> By a new configuration option in all/debian/tpm2deb.cfg selected
...
> be automated in the scripts tpm2deb-source.pl and
> all/deb/tpm2debcommon.pm. Those scripts have access to any dependency
Are as commonplace as possible. Of course we know which are the
scripts and configuration files for our packaging.
What Frank asked is getting your fingers out of .... and write code,
provide patches, be constructive.
If you want something changed, you can say it.
If we disagree it is your bad luck.
But if you want something and provide *CODE*, then we have much
more reason to consider it.
You are just making your case worse by useless emails stating obvious
things.
> If it is a problem that new debian packages would be generated as
> frequently as new fonts are added, the list of separate font packages
> could be listed in detail in the configuration option (making it a bit
> less readable, though). The implementation could then collect the new
> fonts into a separate -others package that would in every aspect act
> like a single font package which happens to contain a growing number of
> fonts until someone adds them to the list in the configuration. That
> -others package would of course have the disadvantage of unsteady content.
And who cares for the necessary replaces ... etc etc.
Seems you are not doing much packaging.
As said, for me this case is closed.
And suggestion should go upstream to TeX Live.
Best wishes
Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PIDDLETRENTHIDE (n.)
A trouser stain caused by a wimbledon (q.v.). Not to be confused with
a botley (q.v.)
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
Reply to: