Re: Redhat and Tetex

On 29 Jan 2004, David Kastrup wrote:

> Tim Waugh <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 10:38:19AM +0000, Robin Fairbairns wrote:
> >
> > > why should the tex community be involved in a commercial
> > > organisation?  i've been using tetex 2 in this department for a
> > > _long_ time, and tetex's gone through at least one (possibly 2)
> > > full new versions since then.  what on earth more do you want? ...
> > > i'm almost beginning to believe that you really are seeking more
> > > fly-by-night software.
> >
> > If there is a newer version than 2.0.2, please let me know where.
> > Our tetex RPM package (yes, the one in Fedora -- which incidentally
> > feeds into the commercial Red Hat Enterprise Linux products, see
> > http://fedora.redhat.com/about/faq/) was updated to 2.0.2 in March.
>
> By the way: about a year back, since I was so appalled with the state
> of RedHat's general TeX support, I contacted some managers specified
> to be responsible for recruiting, and offered to take up its continued
> maintenance for a reasonable fee, as it was obvious that nobody
> in-house knew enough to care.
>
> I did not even get a reply.
>
> --
> David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
>

And herein lies the reason that Debian (being a Free distribution) should
be given all the support it can. Granted some of the software is out of
date but at least it works (most of the time). Hopefully when the new
installer is completed, sarge will finally be released. Along with a
solid functional tetex.
Doesn't TexLive obey the Debian license? It would seem to be a good
idea to have a debian package for debian?