[6386] in SIPB bug reports
Re: /mit/sipb/lib/tex/macros
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (chad brown)
Tue Jun 24 17:05:16 1997
To: Salvatore Valente <svalente@dimins.com>
Cc: bug-sipb@MIT.EDU, bert@MIT.EDU, bug-newtex@MIT.EDU, tex-contrib@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 24 Jun 1997 16:29:06 EDT."
<199706242029.QAA09679@krusty.dimins.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 17:04:59 EDT
From: chad brown <yandros@MIT.EDU>
This message is bcc'd to cfyi so that they will know what's going on,
but won't have to put up with all the traffic. If anyone only on cfyi
wants to follow it, the bug-sipb discuss meeting is publicly readable.
For background, the sipb-new locker recently became the sipb locker.
When this happened, the sipb locker no longer had most of what used to
be in /mit/sipb/lib/tex. Certain things have been added back in as a
compatibility effort, but I expect that these additions may be short
term.
What follows is my opinion.
o It is reasonable for the sipb locker to contain interesting tex macro
packages that aren't part of the standard [La]TeX installation
(although I might alternately suggest that tex-contrib is a better
locker for such things).
o most, if not all, of what used to be in /mit/sipb/lib/tex does not
meet the above qualifications.
o making a link from /mit/sipb/lib/tex to /mit/sipb/share/tex is not a
good long-term strategy, as it breaks the architecture dependance
model, but I'm willing to live with it for a while in order ot not
break things.
o the tex/fonts directory should not be in the sipb locker, *I
think*. I'm a bit unsure about this. Does newtex need to reference
fonts in the sipb locker in order to increase reliability? Are
there fonts there that aren't available in other places? If not,
should there be?
I'd like to hear opinions on what people think should be done. If
tex-contrib and newtex are actively enough maintained and open to
submissions, then perhaps it is time for the sipb locker to get out of
the tex macro busniess altogether?
chad
