Re: Draft new DFSG - r1.4
I don't have TeX license at hand at now, but it works as follows:
i. you can distribute the modified sources only as original WEB
sources plus WEB patches (i.e., "change files").
ii. you can distribute a binary obtained from the modified sources
(modified = orig.source+changefiles) and still call it TeX only if
the initex program runned on the trip.tex file produces the same
results of the original TeX. Else you have to name it another way
Note that I consider TeX one of the major pieces of free software
(along with gcc, emacs and such) and ANY license that puts TeX out
of main is, IMHO, a BAD BAD BAD (did I say BAD?) license.
On Fri, Nov 27, 1998 at 02:28:31PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Ilya L Ovchinnikov wrote:
> > I say again: TeX _IS_ definetly free software and IMHO any version
> > of DFSG which treat it as non-free is not good thing.
> /usr/doc/tetex-base/copyright only gives this as a license:
> Copyright for tetex-base, tetex-extra and tetex-doc:
> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
> (at your option) any later version.
> On Debian GNU/Linux systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public
> License may be found in /usr/doc/copyright/GPL
> If this is incorrect, can anyone post the complete license here for
> our consideration?
> Richard Braakman
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com
Federico Di Gregorio | / mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Debian developer! | / -1 http://pcamb6.irfmn.mnegri.it/~fog
*-=$< ;-P TeX Winzard? |/ http://www.debian.org