Re: Non-DFSG TeXLive stuff [was: Re: texlive-basic_2005-1_i386.changes REJECTED]
Norbert Preining wrote:
> To my reading that thread didn't end in a conclusion that it is not
> Furthermore, IMHO, if it would be *not* acceptable, then we would
> have to remove all, I repeat *ALL* LPPL licensed packages.
> I guess this is something we don't want to have in Debian.
Yes, I figured that the LPPL could probably squeak by debian-legal
(otherwise I wouldn't have ITP'ed XyMTeX), but I was more concerned
about the somewhat contradictory-seeming reply from upstream. Possibly
he has misinterpreted the meaning of the LPPL? But when there is a
conflict between the written license in the package and the author's
expressly stated wishes, it seems safest to assume that the latter are
> This [upstream's reply] seems strange, I guess there was a
> misunderstanding, because the right to distribute the file unchanged
> is given in the file itself. Hard to say since we don't see the mail
> exchange with Shinsaku Fujita.
I attach our entire email exchange (with some extraneous headers
removed). I emailed once, to which he didn't reply; sent a follow-up
email about a week later; and he finally gave the brief reply I quoted
earlier. Apologies for the top-quoting in this exchange.
I wasn't quite sure what to make of his reply so I didn't follow up
further. Probably TeX Live or someone else distributing XyMTeX should
do so, though.
Kevin B. McCarty <email@example.com> Physics Department
WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University
GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544
--- Begin Message ---
- To: "Kevin B. McCarty" <kmccarty@Princeton.EDU>
- Subject: Re: Licensing questions about XyMTeX
- From: Fujita Shinsaku <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:53:16 +0900
- Message-id: <200504250959590.SM01568@dcmt.chem.kit.ac.jp>
- In-reply-to: <4268F069.email@example.com>
- References: <4268F069.firstname.lastname@example.org>
Dear Dr. McCarty
I regret to say that only personal redistribution (except CTAN) is permissible.
Thank your for your kind attention to XyMTeX.
"Kevin B. McCarty" <kmccarty@Princeton.EDU> wrote:
> I hope my previous email didn't come at a bad time for you - I realize
> it was probably unexpected. When you have a chance, I would be very
> grateful if you could look over my questions about XyMTeX licensing
> (attached again below for your convenience) and respond. I've found
> XyMTeX a very useful tool, and I would love to see the Debian Project
> distribute it, so that it might reach a larger audience.
> best regards,
> Kevin McCarty
> On 04/14/2005 06:10 PM, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> > Dear sir:
> > I just discovered XyMTeX today and I want to thank you for making such a
> > useful LaTeX package available! I am using it for my doctoral thesis.
> > To make it easier for others to install, I would like to package XyMTeX
> > for the Debian GNU/Linux operating system (please check
> > http://www.debian.org/ if you are not familiar with it). In order to do
> > this I need to better understand some things about the license under
> > which it is available.
> > 1) In some of the files compressed in the xymtx402.lzh file, you have
> > the following statement:
> > % Copying of this file is authorized only if either
> > %
> > % (1) you make absolutely no changes to your copy, including name and
> > % directory name
> > % (2) if you do make changes,
> > % (a) you name it something other than the names included in the
> > % ``xymtex'' directory and
> > % (b) you acknowledge the original name.
> > % This restriction ensures that all standard styles are identical.
> > Is it permitted for people to distribute modified versions of XyMTeX as
> > well as copying it, as long as they follow conditions 2a and 2b? (In
> > other words, do you intend "copying" to include "redistribution"?)
> > 2) Some of the files (the PDFs, for instance) do not include a licensing
> > statement, and there is no license that specifically encompasses every
> > file. Under what license do you intend to distribute those files?
> > 3) Some files, for instance doc402/jobdoc402/xymps402.tex, contain a
> > statement "This file is not permitted to be translated into Japanese and
> > any other languages." May I ask the reasoning behind this? This
> > restriction would not make it possible to distribute XyMTeX in the
> > "main" section of software distributed by Debian; it would have to go
> > into the so-called "non-free" section which is not as well-supported nor
> > as much used.
> > 4) Is it permitted to remove some files (for instance, the .dtx files)
> > that will not be needed by most users, from a copy of XyMTeX that might
> > be redistributed by someone?
> > 5) Is it permitted to move some files (for instance the .pdf files) to a
> > different directory, in a copy of XyMTeX that might be redistributed by
> > someone? Users of Debian packages usually expect to find documentation
> > in one specific location (not under texmf), for instance.
> > 6) May people also distribute the file
> > http://imt.chem.kit.ac.jp/fujita/fujitas3/xymtex/xym101/xymdvi/xymtex.pdf
> > under the same license that you decide upon for my question (2)?
> > Thank you very much for your time. I am looking forward to hearing your
> > answers.
> > Best regards,
> Kevin B. McCarty <email@example.com> Physics Department
> WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University
> GPG public key ID: 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544
--- End Message ---