Installing TDS at Sussex

[K. Berry]

    odd classifying images as TeX sources, just because TeX happens to be
    one of the programs which reads them.

It is weird, I agree. But I don't see any practical value in
complicating the TEXINPUTS path.

    But I guess I don't particularly care whether the files are
    texmf/images/<type>/<bundle> or texmf/tex/images/<type>/<bundle> or
    even texmf/tex/generic/images/<type>.  

I think I like that last, for images that aren't part of any package.
(I don't know if there are any packages that include .eps's, for that matter.)

But what are <type> and <bundle>?

    But I think we should say
    something about where they should go.

I agree.

     > Are there any real local installations out there with two complete texmf
     > trees?
    i could imagine starting one

I can imagine lots of things :-). Even with a readonly tree off a CD, I
suspect some people will prefer to make individual local directories
with additional stuff, rather than a complete separate tree. No one will
prefer any one thing. I don't know. Let's work on getting the CD out :-).

    i just want to ensure that if you see tex/latex/umb, it means the same
    thing to you and me both.

At the moment I export a `umb' package to the world, that's the moment
at which it should be registered, using whatever mechanisms we have for
registering packages in general. (At the moment, that mechanism being
``existence on CTAN'' :-). How's that?