Texlive packaging

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

>>>>> "GH" == Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com> writes:

GH> Makes sense to me, not only for texlive, stuff like perl pkgs from
GH> cpan have pretty standard way to be built too.

It's not just how the packages are built.  There are also bundling and
license issues which require manual inspection.  The only reason for
allowing texlive would be because it's already undergone a full license
audit.  Unless someone has done that for CPAN, I certainly wouldn't vote
for a blanket exception if this came before FPC (which it probably
wouldn't anyway, because this is more of a FESCo issue).

 - J<