Re: forwarded message from Jeff Licquia
> My point is that ......
I give up. I don't think your point makes any sense, and as you only
assert it without giving any reasons I don't see what else there is to
say on the issue.
There is in any case no point continuing the thread as this is really a
general discussion about the merits of LPPL. The particular case of
latex's execution strategy might be relevant in a specific decision
about latex, but LPPL is drafted to be able to be applied to any
program if the author of the program chooses that licence.
Clearly it could be the case that an LPPL'ed program was found to have a
security problem, and it is reasonable for the Debian maintainers to
consider what they could do if they found themseleves distributing such
a thing.
I am sure that LPPL as drafted or with minor changes that anyone cares
to suggest gives enough freedom to the debian maintainers to stop
distributing the dangerous code and instead distribute a fixed code. The
only thing LPPL does is makes sure that the end user notices that a fix
has been applied. Which is probably a good thing as otherwise code may
move by accident from Debian (where it runs safely) to some other system
(where it does not).
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: