[Bug 229182] Review Request: texlive-texmf-errata - Errata for texlive-texmf

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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 axel.thimm at atrpms.net  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.