-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 4 May 1998, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> Hi, > some time ago I expressed the intent to package fontinst > (a TeX/LaTeX package). I asked the author about the licence > and here's what I got. It is not DFSG but we *do* have latex > in tetex. So is it right for main? Thanx, federico. > > ----- Forwarded message ----- > > The fontinst package is distributed under the same > restrictions as LaTeX, ie it should be distributed unchanged. Not all of LaTeX in teTeX have this restrictive license. That's why part of it have been moved to tetex-nonfree in non-free. I think most of LaTeX is covered by the special DFSG condition "The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.". If this applies to fontinst, then it would be ok for main. If it just forbids derived works, not even under a different name, it surely would not. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: latin1 iQCVAgUBNU3fRiqK7IlOjMLFAQHJuAQAkVlzPlDeUJnEd9EU6L6YI0a+ALz0ZD9h niepHR9xjbqOQjdmT0ILvHmOFxmqz2PEw0BRIcQlSbOKPu4ld0fJGObwhh23yRlZ SIGJ3VsDZ7Ngvlfmrcfb9uDAVuNe2AZHSdZjlbltD3XtqOOBqoAu33AkHej0qpNE eNvUc+gbwH4= =7Qbr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
