[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Suggestion for dual-licensed LaTeX (was Re: Encoding the name in the file contents (was Re: Towards a new LPPL draft))



> Plus, I've yet to hear a good argument for why the \NeedsTeXFormat thing
> isn't DFSG-free.

I think it's a matter of which direction it's coming from.  There are
several variants which are free, and several which aren't.  For
example:

1. "You can't distribute code using \NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX} unless
   you're a LaTeX maintainer."

2. "You can only distribute code using
   \NeedsTeXFormat{NonstandardLaTeX} unless you're a LaTeX maintainer."

3. "You may not change the \NeedsTeXFormat{} string unless you're the
   original author."

4. "If you modify the file, and if the file had a
   \NeedsTeXFormat{} string and an \OriginalNeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX}
   already, you may not distribute it with the same NeedsTeXFormat
   argument as the \OriginalNeedsTeXFormat argument.  You may not
   modify the OriginalNeedsTeXFormat argument or the functioning of
   the NeedsTeXFormat or OriginalNeedsTeXFormat commands."

I take it 4 is what's being considered?

-Brian

Attachment: pgpZqrSz40gAF.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: