On Sat, Jul 20, 2002 at 09:49:15PM +0200, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > > > - to fork you have to rename every package under LPPL > > > > > all of them wrong (and explained over and over again by now) > > > > It has been *asserted* over and over again that this is wrong, but > > that assertation does not seem to be consistent with the actual > > license text we're discussing. It says that each *file* must be > > renamed if it is changed, and since each package is a file that has > > the package name as its file name, it logically follows that one would > > have to rename all packages. > > > > Have I overlooked something in the license? > > no. *each* file that you change must be renamed, but where is the problem > here? I think it has also been demonstrated that is neither excessive nor in > conflict with DSFG 3+4
As long as you offer DFSG-free options, you can offer as many other options as you want. You can say: "you can distribute modified files if 1: you rename the program to something other than 'Latex', 2: you rename all modified files, *or* 3: you swear loyalty to Frank Mittelbach." #1 is DFSG-free. #2 (and presumably #3) is not, but we don't have to choose them. David Carlisle has said that, with some exceptions, option #1 is okay with him [1], and I'm assuming you two are in agreement. That one's DFSG-free. (I can't say if the exceptions, regarding the latex search path, are.) However, option #1 isn't in the license. This is what Henning was asking about. [1] Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
