LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 15 Jul 2002 22:40:19 +0200
Reply-To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Subject:
From:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Comments:
Resent-From: [log in to unmask] Originally-From: Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Will Newton writes:
 > No amount of license changes will prevent site administrators making their
 > own changes to their LaTeX installation, and I would hope major
 > distributors

if so then why bother to license anything at all?

 > would have enough respect for their users and the LaTeX community not to make
 > such a gratuitous change in any case.

the problem is that prior to LPPL (which is now in use for a number of years)
many people were not even aware that they do something "wrong" to the community
and their local users. now most of them are (at least within the LaTeX
community)

 > No, I do not believe this is a good
 > argument for making a package unfree.

it would certainly a bad reason to make a package unfree. my claim is that it
isn't!

frank

ATOM RSS1 RSS2