Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> > it has no provision for the author/supporter "disappearing" from LaLa
> 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've tried to come up with a good general-purpose way to express the
"proof of disappearance", and have not come up with anything robust.
If it were just for myself, I could say "not posting to the usenet
newsgroup comp.text.tex for six months", but that's not good for most
people. The condition of "reachable by email" makes the most sense,
if there is an email address in the package source, but email addresses
change, and perhaps the return address doesn't get updated.
Donald Arseneau [log in to unmask]