Re: User's thoughts about LPPL
> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 04:15:20 -0400
> From: Glenn Maynard <email@example.com>
> If the core can be changed in any way without changing it directly,
> then you can break output exactly as well by this mechanism as you
> could by editing it directly.
No, because to change the core you need to make an explicit decision,
like using a command
LaTeX team does not mind you using or distributing a changed
LaTeX. It does not want you to use it AND call it LaTeX.
> Of course, if I distribute my broken copy of Latex and call it Latex, it
> might cause some grief, since people who think they're getting Latex are
> getting something else. That's why some people use licenses that say
> that if you distribute changed versions, you need to call the program
> something else. No matter how much (or how subtly) I break Latex, and
> no matter how many people I distribute it to, it's not going to cause
> preventable problems if I call it something else.
That is exactly the intention of LPPL as far as I understand it.
Kime's Law for the Reward of Meekness:
Turning the other cheek merely ensures two bruised cheeks.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com