Re: Towards a new LPPL draft
On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 10:40, Boris Veytsman wrote:
> What about files that are individually released under LPPL? There are
> hundreds of files contributed by individual authors (and I presume
> being "works" under DFSG#4) with the "rename if you change" license.
I've seen that some people include the "LPPL 1.2 or any later version"
language into their license notice. Those people would be fine
(although I would recommend that notice be given of this particular
license change as a gesture of goodwill to the community).
For the rest, someone should track them down and ask if they agree to
this. I assume that the authors have placed contact information inside
their independent works, so this might not be so difficult.
It's possible that the "main part" of LaTeX could be licensed under the
LPPL 1.3 (with the new file rename relaxation), and portions could have
an additional restriction applied that re-applies the old-style filename
restriction. This would not be ideal from Debian's point of view, but
it would end the debate regarding the freeness of "LaTeX", and move the
burden to us for dealing with those holdout files.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com