Donald,

 > I have another problem with the use of LPPL for contributed packages:
 > it has no provision for the author/supporter "disappearing" from LaLa
 > LaTeX land, and prevents anybody from adopting support in perpetuity.
 > This is not really a problem for the LaTeX core distribution.

I agree with you that this is a threat. but do you have a good suggestion on
how to resolve it? Bernard suggested "as long as the author can be reached by
email [or ...]"

is that the way to go? and if so how would that be phrased? And what would be
exactly the status of such parentless software?

should it require somebody else stepping in and anouncing to support the
software? (prior to being allowed to take over?) or would after that period
the software essentially become GPL (ie changeable by anybody without actually
maintaing it, ie generating the language problem LPPL tries to avoid?)

i personally think that it is important to require a take-over responsibility
--- otherwsie i think it would be better to leave a package alone unchange but
identical everywhere.

comments? (including suggestions for a license text please :-)

frank