From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
Subject: TeX Live
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 15:38:58 +0200
Message-ID: <87zhooagzx.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
References: <871s3a4xd4.fsf@gnu.org> <874l6w23vg.fsf@ambrevar.xyz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33984)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1hGl0P-0004dl-B6
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:53:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <874l6w23vg.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> (Pierre Neidhardt's message of
	"Wed, 17 Apr 2019 14:49:39 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel" <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz>
Cc: Guix-devel <guix-devel@gnu.org>

Hi Pierre,

Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz> skribis:

> About 1.0 release date set to April the 30th, I can think of one big
> obstacle still in the way: texlive.  Currently I cannot compile a
> standard LaTeX document with a table (can anyone reproduce?).
>
> The big TeXlive revamp is on its way on the "wip-texlive" branch, but I
> won't realistically have time to work on it before the end of the month.
> I don't know if anyone else has got the time.  Jelle?  Ricardo?

To me this doesn=E2=80=99t have to be done on 1.0.  The current TeX Live
situation is not as good as what will come after, but it=E2=80=99s better t=
han
what we had before :-), and I=E2=80=99d say it=E2=80=99s good enough.

For the specific usability issue you mention (what=E2=80=99s the right pack=
age
to install when one wants tables?), I think we should add a section in
the manual, as has been discussed before.

> Whether it's a blocker or not for 1.0 is debatable I guess.  It looks a
> bit bad.  Maybe show a disclaimer on the download page / manual that
> this broken part is currently being addressed?

Definitely not a blocker IMO, though I agree that this is important
work.

Thanks,
Ludo=E2=80=99.