Am 01.08.17 um 16:34 schrieb Arthur Reutenauer: > Hence Will is correct in stating that the LPPL does not require > changing the filename, right? The “most important thing” in his words > (“lowest common denominator” in yours), is that the new file identify > itself as a modified version. The recommendation that follows is a > different thing. He is right that LPPL does not enforce this. But Werner is looking for something that works well for himself and for his users and will made 3 suggestions for this a) ask the maintainer - good :-) b) do an in situ change (as LPPL allows that) - not good, such code could for exmaple not appear on CTAN c) provide the changed code under a new name and tell LaTeX that the orginal package has already been loaded - good again as you pointed out Werner was a little vague in whether or not this is local to himself or not. If it is local, then by all means it would be fine to just use \typeout or \ProvidePackage but if the intention is to distribute alongside his documentation a patched package (even if that package is only intended for this particular documentaton then this is not so good and I think Werner means the latter cheers frank