Re: Towards a new LPPL draft
23-Jul-02 15:02 Mittelbach, Frank wrote:
> 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.
The question here is how to guarantee that a changed overcite.sty
(without renaming) will not be used with pristine LaTeX, right? If so,
LPPL in case of modification without renaming could, for example,
require to change an argument of \NeedsTeXFormat macro, i.e. to
replace
\NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}
in overcite.sty by something like
\NeedsTeXFormat{sniffenlatex}
(or to add such a macro if it was not there).
After that, pristine LaTeX will not process this file.
And in sniffenlatex one should redefine \NeedsTeXFormat (say,
following an example in future cfgguide) so that it will accept
`LaTeX2e' and `sniffenlatex' as an argument. Then sniffenlatex will be
able to process both files intended for pristine LaTeX and files
intended solely for sniffenlatex.
Sasha
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: