Are you saying this _after_ reading Barbara Beeton's comments?
BTW a number of licenses are accepted by and in use at CTAN.
> > is actually already there (and he was satisfied with it).
> Fact is that the LPPL is no approved license for Sourceforge,
. . .
> I know your rationale for the license, but the fact that it's not
> approved by theses repositories makes life at least more
> complicated than needed.
I think that LaTeX project needs in the matter of software components
for tex, the program, and its cousins _are_ more complicated than
those for ordinary programs. Note, that GNU provides a variant
license for libraries than for applications. Don't we have a
different type of object here?