Re: Towards a new LPPL draft
sorry, I shouldn't have tried to answer your private mail in haste while
getting my coat to rush to the office.
I made a two typos ad least and one important one:
> as of now it would mean that for each individual work under LPPL you have
to
> folow its license meaning you have to rename the work (i thought that was
should have been
follow its license meaning that you have to rename the files that you
change (i thought that was ...
as I said, sorry that was not deliberate. But for me work and file name
within the LATeX
context is very tightly linked. I mean, if you have the single file
overcite.sty
under LPPL then what other is the "work" then this file, ie how do you
rename it without renaming the
file? (yes you can put it into a tar ball, but this is not the way we think
defines "work")
If you think of LPPL applying to the whole of a LaTeX sty/cls tree of files
at once, we could, i think
live with the idea (it is even described so in modguide or cfgguide as a
possible though not encouraged
solution (thereby actually violating the license as it is right now)), that
you produce sniffenlatex
which has its own complete tree and in there has identical file names to the
pristine LaTeX tree so
that both trees live side by side.
But the problem here is that LPPL doesn'T apply to the whole thing but
individually to its many parts.
so if you only wnat to change overcite.sty there is nothing nowhere to put
it and i don'T see how you
describe (or even want to) that for that change you have to duplicate the
whole tree.
in contrast: if your sniffenlatex implements the filename remapping then
all you have to do is to
produce new versions of the (possibly few) files you actually want to
change, stick them into the
latex tree together with the unchanged ones there and all works (ie both
your sniffenlatex as well
as the pristine latex using the same files where applicable and different
files where needed).
cheers
frank
-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: Brian Sniffen [mailto:bts@alum.mit.edu]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Juli 2002 15:22
An: Frank Mittelbach
Cc: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Betreff: Re: Towards a new LPPL draft
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Frank Mittelbach <frank.mittelbach@latex-project.org> writes:
> > 2) Does the draft LPPL prevent me from distributing a program called
> > "SniffenTeX" which is a modified derivative work of LaTeX, but
> > would be run by a user as sniffentex and carries a banner stating
> > that it is SniffenTeX, not LaTeX? If it doesn't prevent me, what
> > restrictions does it place on me?
>
> as of now it would mean that for each individual work under LPPL you have
to
> folow its license meaning you have to rename the work (i thought that was
> discussed on the list at some detail) --- all of these works could live
side
> by side on your machine
That's the important bit, and what I wanted to make sure I'd clearly
understood from you (I think most folks on debian-legal believe
differently): if I rename the *work*, I don't have to rename the
files I change within it. Is this correct?
- -Brian
- --
Brian Sniffen bts@alum.mit.edu
http://www.evenmere.org/~bts/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9PViH03mlJHngJfERAss5AJ9PsAGz7VemPaZUwG2BA6jYgzCKygCeLPsq
g7MamrPGEOcqYoMMeP4rPnM=
=ZI3V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: