Re: Copyright of fontinst.
On Mon, May 04, 1998 at 05:31:20PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> On Mon, 4 May 1998, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> > Hi,
> > some time ago I expressed the intent to package fontinst
> > (a TeX/LaTeX package). I asked the author about the licence
> > and here's what I got. It is not DFSG but we *do* have latex
> > in tetex. So is it right for main? Thanx, federico.
> > ----- Forwarded message -----
> > The fontinst package is distributed under the same
> > restrictions as LaTeX, ie it should be distributed unchanged.
> Not all of LaTeX in teTeX have this restrictive license.
> That's why part of it have been moved to tetex-nonfree in non-free.
> I think most of LaTeX is covered by the special DFSG condition
> "The license may require derived works to carry a different name or
> version number from the original software.".
> If this applies to fontinst, then it would be ok for main. If it just
> forbids derived works, not even under a different name, it surely would
He told me fontinst license is just like LaTeX one: LaTeX's in main
so i'llput fontinst there. Thanx, federico
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3ia
> Charset: latin1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Federico Di Gregorio <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)
"Never lost your fine sig in a disk crash? Surely I did!"
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org