> but it's since been restored, again per author's request. (and
> neither implies nor denies xecjk, which i presume is an xetex
> package of some sort.)
Strange. I only see this:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctan-ann@dante.de/msg01734.html
but I don't see a message that the xeCJK package has been removed.
Wen-Chang, can you explain?
Werner