Re: latex-unicode sources and licensing
Am 26.07.2011 12:27, schrieb Lionel Elie Mamane:
> Given that the true sources seem to have disappeared, I suppose we
> could consider the .sty file to be its own source; it is a stretch,
> but removing unicode support for (La)TeX would be rather
> ... damaging. I really, really vote for that the absolute upper limit
> to what we would do about this is we move it to non-free, not remove
> (I want good unicode support in my LaTeX!).
For the ftp-team the question is: What file would you edit, if you
would need to do any modification on it? If it's feasible to edit the
sty (even so it's not the original source), and you would edit the sty
if you needed to make a change, then that's what we would consider to be
>> %% This program is provided under the terms of the LaTeX Project Public
>> %% License with some modifications.
>> %% See the file LICENSE (http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/content/LICENSE)
>> %% for information.
>> I can't find that file [.. neither in Debian sources nor in
>> upstream...], and /usr/share/doc/texlive-latex-extra does not
>> contain licensing information for it (I grepped for "ucs" and
>> "unicode" and did not find anything). So how do we know whether it
>> is DFSG-free software? What are the "some modifications" above?
> Formally even: how do we know we can redistribute it in the way we
but haven't read the content, yet.