| 1 |
Dear all, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
app-text/tetex is currently assigned to tex as maintainer, but, in my |
| 4 |
opinion, that's a lie. I have not seen any movement on tetex bugs for a |
| 5 |
while. |
| 6 |
I have opened a tracker bug (#227443, [1]), if someone feels the |
| 7 |
courage of picking it up. I don't have neither the time nor the will to |
| 8 |
do it myself. |
| 9 |
While it has been stated since more than two years on tetex's homepage |
| 10 |
that people should use texlive [2], we still cannot really remove it |
| 11 |
from our tree. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
What I'm planning to do, if nobody comes to maintain it, is to reassign |
| 14 |
its bugs to maintainer-needed and update its metadata.xml to reflect |
| 15 |
that. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
In case we have someone crazy enough to pick it up, I am of course |
| 18 |
available to try to answer any question. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The other option is to p.mask and last rite it, breaking mips and s390 |
| 22 |
trees, leaving them without tex support at all. This would also |
| 23 |
leave arm and sh with only ptex as tex support. Thus that is not really |
| 24 |
an option yet, but I suppose there is no point in waiting forever on |
| 25 |
this. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards, |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Alexis. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=227443 |
| 32 |
[2] http://tug.org/teTeX/ |
Archives