Re: How to deal with teTeX's and texlive's RC licensing bugs

[Frank Küster <frank@debian.org>]

Hi,

I should always go riding my bike *before* writing long e-mails.  I
always get the best ideas when moving my legs.

Frank Küster <frank@debian.org> wrote:

> a) Either remove all problematic files from the orig.tar.gz right now,
>    with the option to add them again later
[...]
> The good thing about (a) is that any possible breakage in other packages
> (e.g. packages that need non-free components for the build process) have
> good chances to be detected, while some might slip into etch with option
> (b).  On the other hand, option (a) is not in the interest of our users,
> and/or the release process:
>
> - if we do not re-add files that turn out to be free, they will be
>   missing in etch, which doesn't serve our users,
[...]
> [1] TeXLive is probably equally affected

What about option c:

- Remove all problematic files at once from tetex-base's orig.tar.gz,

- but keep them installed with texlive until somewhen at (release - n
  weeks), n=2,3

- state that bugs that affect texlive's ability to be used as a teTeX
  replacement may be NMU'ed.

These bugs are in most cases just Depends: lines that only mention teTeX
and do not allow texlive as an alternative.  Among the packages any
texlive package conflicts with, there might be some more.  Some other
conflicts just indicate that the package is not up-to-date, and texlive
installs the newer version contained by upstream.  Norbert?

This is the list of conflicted-on packages:

circ-tex
dviutils
ethiop
ivritex
lacheck
latex-beamer
latex-svninfo
latex-ucs
latex-ucs-contrib
latex-ucs-uninames
latex-xcolor
lhs2tex
octave-forge
pbox-tex
pdfscreen
pgf
ptex-bin
rcs-latex
tex-chess
tex-skak
textopo

Regards, Frank


-- 
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)