[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 Bug 229182 depends on bug 229180, which changed state. Bug 229180 Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf - Architecture independent parts of the TeX formatting system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229180 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-12-02 06:59 EST --- Successfully built, closing. Thanks for cooperation! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-12-01 15:46 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: texlive-texmf-errata Short Description: Errata for texlive-texmf Owners: jnovy Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-12-01 15:39 EST --- This package is mostly empty for now, as expected. APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-10-28 17:03 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > FWIW I also like the errata package: > > > > o Upstream experts provide the needed delta is bite-ready form > > Is that true? I looked and found no trace of an upstream errata package. > [snip] I stand corrected then. I know texlive is working on this for quite some time and this package implied that it was using upstream updates. This indeed seems not be be true at this point in time. Still when texlive does finally ship updates/errata this will become true. Maybe this is an area where the Fedora/Red Hat packager will create momentum for texlive to finalize this step? > > I also don't think this needs any special fesco/fpc blessing, but if people > > object, then please raise it there and we will discuss it and give it a > > blessing > > or a no-go. > > > > It was raised already, and you even commented :) See > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-August/msg00019.html > > Feelings were mixed, no consensus was reached. I'm glad I'm not contradicting myself ;) OK, from all the people commenting I was the only one on the FPC. And we know Rex favours this approach. So you have 2 gos and nil no-gos ATM. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-10-26 11:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) > FWIW I also like the errata package: > > o Upstream experts provide the needed delta is bite-ready form Is that true? I looked and found no trace of an upstream errata package. [snip] > I also don't think this needs any special fesco/fpc blessing, but if people > object, then please raise it there and we will discuss it and give it a > blessing > or a no-go. > It was raised already, and you even commented :) See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-August/msg00019.html Feelings were mixed, no consensus was reached. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-10-26 11:03 EST --- FWIW I also like the errata package: o Upstream experts provide the needed delta is bite-ready form o Packager can react almost immediately, so users get their hands sooner on the fixes o No stress for mirrors (yes, even in a delta rpm world, the mirror will have to waste bandwidth for updates of megapackages) Asking from the packager to do micro-dismantling of the tarballs is IMHO a waste of his time, I'd rather see him use that time in some other tex/latex packages than to merge erratas and re-subpackage everything again. I also don't think this needs any special fesco/fpc blessing, but if people object, then please raise it there and we will discuss it and give it a blessing or a no-go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-15 08:47 EST --- Isn't the main reason why it wasn't done for other packages that it wouldn't gain much and/or wasn't feasible for them? The texlive-texmf source is special in this regard that it consists of huge number of relatively small files which makes the errata rpm workable. I don't see anything wrong with it if we always ensure that before each release of Fedora the errata package is empty and it will get filled only in the updates repository. The only problem with it I could see is that it is additional burden on the maintainer of texlive packages but if he is willing to take it I'd say why not? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-06 18:03 EST --- As I mentioned before, I think the texlive-errata scheme smells quite bad and is a new paradigm for fedora packaging. This SHOULD be discussed by FESCO and the packaging committee before being accepted IMO. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-02 08:18 EST --- I just uploaded the new texlive packages: http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/files/texlive/ Main features/differences from the previous version: 1. dropped former texjive zip list for the texmf trees and texlive now uses the zips generated from the scheme-tetex.tpm from upstream 2. reintroduced texlive-errata updating scheme Seems like we have the first functional texlive release based on scheme-tetex now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-08 04:51 EST --- We can eventually reintroduce it as the review goes on. There's no problem to add it back. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-04 07:34 EST --- fwiw, I thought that texlive-errata was a good approach. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-04 04:52 EST --- Ok, I dropped the texlive-errata updating scheme from the new TeXLive rpms, so closing this for now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-16 06:45 EST --- It seems like the separate texmf-errata package loses its main point as soon as the deltarpm based updating system starts to work properly. The question is how to fine grain packaging of the the texmf tree for TeXLive and if it does even make sense if we take the diff updating scheme into account. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-16 06:03 EST --- Hi Jindrich, While I understand your separate packaging of errata follows upstream, I think that packaging errata in this way for Fedora needs some discussion. This is a totally different packaging paradigm - as far as I'm aware there's no precedent for issuing errata packages rather than updated packages. A far better alternative IMO is to have finer grained subpackaging of the texlive texmf tree, such that updates don't replace the whole thing. That of course has other major advantages, such as allowing smaller tex installs. Also, to have *two* system managed texmf trees searched is a big change, and something else that system admins have to think about when they add their own local texmf trees. Put more bluntly, while I understand the convenience from a packagers point of view, this seems like a really ugly way to package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||229180 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229182 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: TeXLive 2007|Review Request: texlive- |- errata for the noarch part|texmf-errata - Errata for |of the TeX formatting system|texlive-texmf AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis|| Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-04-10 15:50 EST --- I can get started on these, and please submit review for texlive (binaries, if you haven't already, I didn't check... yet). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
