LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 11:08:44 +0100
text/plain (27 lines)
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 10:14:30PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote:

> approach as an option (i.e. to put LaTeX under GPL) that we came to the
> conclusion that it is not the right approach for software of a type like
> LaTeX.

The GPL/LaTeX issue was evidently settled long ago,
and I wouldn't like to re-open an old hornet's nest,
but I've seen you refer several times to the difference in kind or type
between LaTeX and GPL-ed programs.

I don't really see this difference.
If someone put out a new version of stdio.h ,
it seems to me it would cause exactly the same kind of chaos
as if they put out a new version of article.cls .
I've never come across rival versions of, say, Linux kernel files --
except in different versions of the kernel.

Does this danger actually arise in practice?

Timothy Murphy
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
tel: 086-233 6090
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland