LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 11:03:04 +0200
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (50 lines)
Heiko Oberdiek writes:
 > * Is this "redistribution" compliant with LPPL? Is this considered
 >   as "Compiled Work"? With the exception of inputenc.dtx (fixing
 >   the bug in order to be able to compile it) the sources are
 >   unmodified during the generation of the PDF files, however
 >   special configuration files are used. Would Clause 3 of
 >   "Conditions on Distribution and Modification" apply?

I would say yes, it is a compiled work especially as it contains the sources
unchanged (that was one reason of the term to allow something like a TL
distribution to rearrange and unpack).

The change of inputenc.dtx although necessary, would be in violation though,
but that can be amended by giving Heiko permission (and fixing the file which
i did in the sources)

If one considers the change to inputenc as a derived work (which technically
it is) then to fullfil 6a one could do something like

%<cp1250>  \ProvidesFile{cp1250.def}
   [2006/05/05 v1.1b Input encoding file + documentation fix by HOb]

but it should be easier to get an updated file on CTAN and use that :-)

 > > And having them on CTAN makes it easier to use them for TL (and other
 > > distributions, I imagine).
 > I agree.
 > > Perhaps, for example, 
 > > macros/latex/
 > > macros/latex/required/
 > > macros/latex/required/
 > > macros/latex/required/
 > Back to latex-tds. I think the location above needs the permission
 > of the LaTeX project team. Without permission perhaps

I'm quite happy with the above scheme and i doubt that others see this
differently. However, it is really more something for the CTAN people to
decide in my opinion.

Getting the  distribution in a better shape should always be a goal. How much
of what you have done is or can be automated?