David Kastrup writes:

 > I am currently taking a look at the stuff in order to incorporate it.
 > Of course, while you are perfectly obedient to the wording of the
 > licence by renaming everything to xor-bp and the like, it would have
 > been probably somewhat easier if you chose the same filenames just for
 > the patch (though obviously not for other circulation).

i think we should allow *same* file name with

\ProvidePackage{xor <some extra text>}[...]

for that purpose.

that would give a warning but run through otherwise and it helps to identify
such a file if it escapes for some reason

 > I trust that
 > posting patches here does not count as distribution prohibited
 > according to the terms of the licence

yes, this list is neither general distribution nor a CD nor really an archive
(the way it was meant) even though the postings are archived as far as i know.

 > but if it does, I certainly
 > will get corrected within few days at most, and little harm will be
 > done.

you will get corrected? eh? interesting concept :-)

frank