On Sunday 01 December 2002 05:35 am, Ben Reser wrote: > On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 10:06:40PM +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote: > > Whatever dirty trick is used to "comply" with license, i also think it is > > a very bad idea to have them in contrib. However, i would be a very nice > > PLF package... So let's continue the discussion on plf-discuss instead of > > inflating this thread endlessly on cooker. > > I don't really approve of PLF. It has packages on there that aren't > even legal anywhere... e.g. the win32 codecs. No "dirty tricks" are > used at all in that package. Considering that I'm in the US, I won't > join that list... So if someone wants to put my package in PLF that's > their privilege, it's GPL.
Texstar or Ranger would probably be happy to host it for you. AFAICT, Ranger has nothing dodgy (dangerous to DMCA-encumbered citizens) on his box, and Texstar's `dodgies' are things like Flash and RealPlayer, free-to-distribute like the MSFT TTF's in question anyway. Cheers; Leon
