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

Re: Concluding the LPPL debate, try 2



Scripsit Jeff Licquia <licquia@debian.org>
> On Fri, 2002-07-26 at 11:58, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> > On Thu, 2002-07-25 at 16:36, Henning Makholm wrote:

> > >    "If you want to modify a package [say, one that is not part of the
> > >    core LaTeX distribution, but one whose author has independently
> > >    put it under the LPPL], you must either
> > >      1) [do the renaming stuff], or
> > >      2) make sure that your modified package refuses to run on top of
> > >         the standard LaTeX kernel."

> > > If this is correct, I don't think that option (2) is not a free
> > > option.

> Sorry for the extra followup, but it just struck me that I might have
> misparsed this.  Are you saying that you think option 2 is DFSG-free?

I did indeed say so, but it's not what I meant. I erroneously typed
the wrong number of "not"s. What I really think is that it is *not*
free. (But the basic idea is not beyond repair - I'll post details
shortly).

-- 
Henning Makholm                  "Individually, human beings are all dolts.>
                                                     <While collectively...>
                              <Collectively, they're a collection of dolts."


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: