On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 11:37:47AM +0200, Frank K??ster wrote: > Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Is it really necessary to reduce the package as much as necessary for > > the buildds? Wouldn't a more useful goal for a larger number of users > > be to break the package into a "core" package, which is the "common" > > stuff (somewhat arbitrarily defined), which would include what you > > have said plus (pdf)e(la)tex, mf(-nowin), metapost and maybe a small > > amount of other stuff, and an -extra package for everything else. The > > difference to the buildds would be very minor, but for the users could > > be significant. (Note that I'm not advocating things which would > > bring in extra package dependencies.) > > This sounds very sensible. After all, we *will* continue to have lots > of "ordinary" users, and we should care for them. If we choose to go > that way, it is even more important that tetex-base should contain the > complete tex/latex directory, and not be deprived of custom-bib, > koma-script, minitoc and others, as Ralf once suggested.
So which direction should we go for: -core for the autobuilders or -core for average Joe User (including all autobuilder core functionality)? Julian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
