sorry, I shouldn't have tried to answer your private mail in haste while getting my coat to rush to the office. I made a two typos ad least and one important one:
> as of now it would mean that for each individual work under LPPL you have to > folow its license meaning you have to rename the work (i thought that was should have been follow its license meaning that you have to rename the files that you change (i thought that was ... as I said, sorry that was not deliberate. But for me work and file name within the LATeX context is very tightly linked. I mean, if you have the single file overcite.sty under LPPL then what other is the "work" then this file, ie how do you rename it without renaming the file? (yes you can put it into a tar ball, but this is not the way we think defines "work") If you think of LPPL applying to the whole of a LaTeX sty/cls tree of files at once, we could, i think live with the idea (it is even described so in modguide or cfgguide as a possible though not encouraged solution (thereby actually violating the license as it is right now)), that you produce sniffenlatex which has its own complete tree and in there has identical file names to the pristine LaTeX tree so that both trees live side by side. But the problem here is that LPPL doesn'T apply to the whole thing but individually to its many parts. so if you only wnat to change overcite.sty there is nothing nowhere to put it and i don'T see how you describe (or even want to) that for that change you have to duplicate the whole tree. in contrast: if your sniffenlatex implements the filename remapping then all you have to do is to produce new versions of the (possibly few) files you actually want to change, stick them into the latex tree together with the unchanged ones there and all works (ie both your sniffenlatex as well as the pristine latex using the same files where applicable and different files where needed). cheers frank -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- Von: Brian Sniffen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Juli 2002 15:22 An: Frank Mittelbach Cc: debian-legal@lists.debian.org Betreff: Re: Towards a new LPPL draft -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Frank Mittelbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > 2) Does the draft LPPL prevent me from distributing a program called > > "SniffenTeX" which is a modified derivative work of LaTeX, but > > would be run by a user as sniffentex and carries a banner stating > > that it is SniffenTeX, not LaTeX? If it doesn't prevent me, what > > restrictions does it place on me? > > as of now it would mean that for each individual work under LPPL you have to > folow its license meaning you have to rename the work (i thought that was > discussed on the list at some detail) --- all of these works could live side > by side on your machine That's the important bit, and what I wanted to make sure I'd clearly understood from you (I think most folks on debian-legal believe differently): if I rename the *work*, I don't have to rename the files I change within it. Is this correct? - -Brian - -- Brian Sniffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.evenmere.org/~bts/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9PViH03mlJHngJfERAss5AJ9PsAGz7VemPaZUwG2BA6jYgzCKygCeLPsq g7MamrPGEOcqYoMMeP4rPnM= =ZI3V -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
