X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["1259" "Fri" "20" "June" "1997" "11:31:33" "+0100" "Sebastian Rahtz" "s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK" nil "25" "Re: discussing relation of LaTeX to TeX successors" "^Date:" nil nil "6" nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1])
          by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id MAA15381; Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:31:36 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <15.5AF0B610@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:31:35 +0200
Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
          (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 156624 for
          LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 20 Jun 1997 12:31:30 +0200
Received: from pillar.elsevier.co.uk (root@pillar.elsevier.co.uk
          [193.131.222.35]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.7.6/8.7.4) with
          ESMTP id MAA02115 for <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Fri, 20
          Jun 1997 12:31:28 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from snowdon.elsevier.co.uk (snowdon.elsevier.co.uk
          [193.131.197.164]) by pillar.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP
          id LAA05638 for <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Fri, 20 Jun
          1997 11:27:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from cadair.elsevier.co.uk by snowdon.elsevier.co.uk with SMTP (PP);
          Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:31:41 +0100
Received: from knott.elsevier.co.uk (knott.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.197.165]) by
          cadair.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA00745 for
          <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:31:37
          +0100 (BST)
Received: (from srahtz@localhost) by knott.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.3/8.8.5) id
          LAA19917; Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:31:33 +0100 (BST)
References: <970617160600.38c1@vms.rhbnc.ac.uk>
            <199706200908.LAA02070@frank.zdv.uni-mainz.de>
Message-ID:  <199706201031.LAA19917@knott.elsevier.co.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  <199706200908.LAA02070@frank.zdv.uni-mainz.de>
Date:         Fri, 20 Jun 1997 11:31:33 +0100
From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Subject:      Re: discussing relation of LaTeX to TeX successors
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 2124

The point about `easy to install TeX' reminds me of a discussion that
went on and off a year or two ago about `what is a decent minuimum
setup'. All of the packaged setups (teTeX, emtex, oztex, miktex, what
have you) take a different interpretation of what a `core' setup
is. They are getting closer, but we are not there yet. I dont propose
to discuss it, but I point out that its one reason why we dont have
`install TeX from this button' links.

Another (related) reason (sigh) is the fact that most packages still
distribute a macro and font tree; so the happy user can't download a
nice portable TDS tree from <here> and a binary for system X from
<here>, because half the setups do not support TDS.

One of the aims of the TeX Live CD is to define and provide a good TDS
tree (packaged at levels 1, 2 and 3 -- albeit rather crudely),
independent of the system. As the CD demonstrates, you can share the
same support tree between Win 32, Amiga, and Unix already.

if all the TeX systems worked in a similar way (I pray to my gods that
Phil will not start saying VMS is The Only True Way To Organize
Files), it would become more plausible to, for instance, distribute a
TDS LaTeX which pulled in `e-TeX' versions of packages if run with
e-TeX.

Sebastian