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

Re: Revised LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL)

On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:11:34AM -0700, Mark Rafn wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Henning Makholm wrote:
> > AFAIU, what the authors of the LPPL draft is trying to express is
> > nothing more or less than
> > 
> >   1. You must make your modified package output to the screen a message
> >      that it isn't Standard LaTeX.
> Would it be possible to use GPL wording for this?  The ability NOT to do 
> this when written for non-interactive use is important.

Uh, better yet, let's use what the GPL's wording *should* be.  See the
PHPNuke thread.

> >   2. If the environment where your modified package is intended to be
> >      used provides a documented standard way of emitting such messages
> >      to the screen, you must use that.
> I'll need more thought about this.  A requirement to use a specified 
> facility seems unfree to me at first sniff, but I could (yet again) be 
> reading too much into it.

This seems to be mandating the usage of programmatic interface, which
conflicts with my understanding of "freedom to modify".

G. Branden Robinson                |    Any man who does not realize that
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    he is half an animal is only half a
branden@debian.org                 |    man.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    -- Thornton Wilder

Attachment: pgp_Wu8jPb8_B.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: