On 17/12/2007, Jindrich Novy <jnovy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I vote for 2) generally. Considering that TeXLive is mostly a set of
collections gathered from multiple upstreams at some time, it makes
perfectly sense to separate the most frequently used bits to their own
packages and let them updated/maintained separately by their own separate
maintainers.
The ideal situation IMO would be to have only core TeX/LaTeX bits in the
base TeXLive installation and most of the collections that need to be
updated more frequently than TeXLive release cycle (~once per 2 years)
out of it.
To keep consistency with TeXLive, the main texlive/texlive-texmf
packages could Requires: bits packaged separately as soon as someone
decides to maintain it separately. That would keep the TeXLive
updated, based on users' needs even in the middle of the TeXLive
release cycle.
Any thoughts?
Seems reasonable.