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

Re: LPPL, take 2

On 2003-04-16 14:28:44 -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> I understand the rationale.  I'm concerned about the wording.  Would the
> following violate 5(c)?
> % LaTeX-Foobar 1.2.9, copyright 2001--2003 John A. Doe
> %
> % Please report errors to <johndoe@example.com>.
> %
> % MODIFIED BY Jack Smith 2003/04/10 to improve widow and orphan
> % handling.
> %
> % Please report errors in this version to <jacksmith@example.com> and do
> % not use John Doe's address.

Yes (at least it's considered very bad practice). But it would
probably be tolerated (grudgingly) if the modification note came
first. Too many lusers can't read documentation and use the first
address they can find.

Best regards
Our position is that whatever grievances a nation may have, however
objectionable it finds the status quo, aggressive warfare is an illegal
means for settling those grievances or for altering those conditions.
  (Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, the American prosecutor at the
   Nuremberg trials, in his opening statement to the tribunal)

Reply to: