LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for LATEX-L Archives


LATEX-L Archives

LATEX-L Archives


LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LATEX-L Home

LATEX-L Home

LATEX-L  July 2002

LATEX-L July 2002

Subject:

From:

David Carlisle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 16 Jul 2002 22:59:13 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (109 lines)

4) In practice, Debian recognizes "a different name or version number"
   to refer *works*, not filenames.  Permission to mandate or forbid the
   renaming of files is not explicitly granted here, and would not make
   sense from a technological perspective (what to do about primitive
   filesystems with length limitations on filenames, which mandate
   version information in the filename itself, are not case-sensitive,
   or otherwise restrict us from the liberties we are accustomed to
   enjoying on modern Unix filesystems?).  Surely you'd agree that a
   work retains its identity regardless of its title or what means are
   used to identify it.  I can't digitally edit a Disney movie to
   replace the title with my own and thus ignore Disney's copyright on
   the movie.

This misses the point that in latex filenames are part of the end-user
syntax.

\usepackage{longtable}

loads "longtable.sty" which is part of the core latex distribution.
Under msdos this gets stored in all sorts of ways longtabl.sty lontable.sty
longtab~1.sty, whatever, But the underlying TeX system's file handling calls
just have to do the mapping. TeX's file handling is always system dependent
and maps the user syntax to whatever it is (even flat extensionless case
insenstitive file systems on mainframes etc). LaTeX doesn't "know" of this
mapping, it happens at the TeX level.
Storing longtable.sty on a filesystem that doesn't
support 8 letter names isn't considered renaming (or shouldn't be) if the
TeX system
will locate the file with the same \usepackage{longtable} command.

  No, I mean that it's not acceptable for the copyright holders of LaTeX
  to assert intellectual property rights in works created using LaTeX,
  such as masters' theses, conference proceedings, journal articles, or
  philosophical screeds.

Since there is nothing in LPPL or any other part of the latex distribution
that
should lead you to think this might be the case, why bring it up? Of course
that's
not acceptable.


> Why would it be impossible to implement?  I can do it in the shell:

        #!/bin/sh

        if [ -e /usr/share/tex/MODIFIED ]; then
          echo >&2 "WARNING: MODIFIED VERSION OF TEX DETECTED!  OUTPUT MAY
NOT \
  BE =
  STANDARDS-CONFORMANT!"

and you are offering to port that shell script to every system that runs
latex? some of which, as you point out above may not have directory
structures
at all, never mind implementations of /bin/sh.

What is the advantage to the end user of having a "latex" that outputs such
a command
as opposed to a different command altogenther.  Many users of latex never
see a command line (or the terminal output) latex runs behind the scenes as
a print engine from a front end editing tool. (not least, emacs).


    * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
    * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to
      your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a
      precondition for this.
    * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your
      neighbor (freedom 2).
    * The freedom to improve the program, and release your
      improvements to the public, so that the whole community
      benefits. (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a
      precondition for this.


All those freedoms are preserved by the LPPL.
The issue of renaming is an issue but it does not relate to those core
freedoms.



  It seems to me like either there is some miscommunication here, or that
  you are not interested in the LPPL being a free software license.

LPPL is a free software licence. The issue is whether or not it conforms to
the DFSG.
Debian do not have a monopoly on the use of the word Free.  It doesn't
really help
if you use language like "not interested" when Frank has clearly indicated
that
virtually all the text of LPPL is under the knife and can be changed if it
will
help meet the letter of the DFSG. But it needs technical discussion of
problematic
points in the licence, not such broad generalisations.

  the subject of
  eliminating clause 4 from our guidelines has been raised before, and may
  come to a vote sometime this year.  Presumably, you will want the LPPL
  to be a DFSG-free license regardless of the outcome of such a vote.


if that were the case you would presumably remove TeX and the TeX fonts from
Debian as well.
In that case the licence on LaTeX would be moot as without TeX you can't use
LaTeX whatever the licence.

David

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

September 2019
July 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
July 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
November 2004
October 2004
August 2004
July 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
October 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
March 2002
December 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Universität Heidelberg | Impressum | Datenschutzerklärung

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager