Re: [NTG-context] License stuff for ConTeXt
(I'm sorry, I forgot to say "reply all" in the previous post, so I'm
reposting this to the remaining ones; please don't forget to include
the ConTeXt list too when replying)
On 12/22/06, Norbert Preining wrote:
Hi all!
You know what is coming ...
First statement: I would prefer to have context in Debian proper, but if
we cannot get anyway with this, putting all the stuff into the nonfree
section might be an option, although it doesn't sound right.
Ok, I made a list of files in the for zips and took a look. Now it would
be nice to have statements from the respective people about the license:
Please see included stuff:
...
cont-fnt contains a huge bunch of vf/afm/tfm/map files. I assume that
they were generated from some fontinst source, but this is missing.
Hans will know that better, but if you're talking about cont-fnt I
assume that all these files were created with texfont.
afm files contain a header like:
Comment Converted at Fri Mar 18 12:57:24 2005 by ttf2afm from font
file `arial.ttf'
(I guess that texfont calls ttf2afm in that case)
map files contain:
% This file is generated by the TeXFont Perl script.
ConTeXt doesn't use/need fontinst. I assume that all the files were
created only once by running texfont script once per each
font/encoding, most probably manually (although one could easily
reconstruct the ten lines needed to do the conversion). But I don't
know whether the fact that one needs a commercial font in order to
create and use those supporting files matters or not.
Anyway, there is no accompanying readme or whatsoever besides the one
for lucida.
-----------------------------------
cont-ext seems to be ok besides a few points:
t-lettrine.tex does not have a license statement
t-urwgaramond, type-urwgaramond, type-urwgothic: no license
statement
A different thing is that the sources of many doc are not included:
./doc/context/third/bnf/t-bnf.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/chromato/chromato-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/chromato/chromato-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/cmscbf/cmscbf-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/cmscbf/cmscbf-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/cmttbf/cmttbf-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/cmttbf/cmttbf-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/construction-plan/construction-plan-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/construction-plan/construction-plan-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/degrade/degrade-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/degrade/degrade-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/french/french-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/french/french-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/typearea/typearea-demo.pdf NOSOURCE
./doc/context/third/typearea/typearea-doc.pdf NOSOURCE
So I would have to put them in something like context-nonfree (like
other context documentation)
No. All those are all automatically generated from t-whatever.tex.
For example, to get french-demo.pdf you need to run
texexec --mode=demo t-french.tex
and to get french-doc you need to run
texexec --module t-french.tex
But now my question: when I process the document with "--module" (with
texexec.pl and pre-historic version of ConTeXt from april, if that's
relevant ;), I get a whole-page MP graphic on the first page. How are
the modulename-doc created? Are there any metapost-related settings
disabled or has the behavior of texexec changed in the meantime?
Mojca
Reply to: