>> Dima, in fact, it's not soooo easy with (La)TeX. It depends on how >> you see it. One way is that TeX (the program) is a compiler that >> translates the sources (i.e. .tex, .sty, and .bib, ... files -- >> which can count as the program sources since TeX is a programming >> language). Then the .dvi or .pdf file would be considered as the >> compiled form of the sources. With this point of view, Waldek is >> right. > > I don't get your point. There is no problem like this with GPL, and I > don't know why this was mentioned in the 1st place... Surely you can > put out a software with a license saying that by using it you sell > yourself into slavery, but this does not mean that something is wrong > with GPL...
I never said that something is wrong with GPL. Quite the contrary. I'd like to have GPL for FriCAS. >> But I don't really think that most people thing that way. >> Unfortunately, there is no clear statement from the FSF about this. >> But also this is somehow a non-issue. If my published paper would >> be GPL then I have to provide the .tex and .sty files. So what? > Why is that even mentioned? There are no GPL-licensed programs that > tell you anything about copyright of the data you process with them. Although, I somehow see it like you, it is not that easy with (La)TeX. Let's try to make to other viewpoint clearer. There is TP (TeX the program, i.e. the program that translates .tex+.sty into .dvi) and there is TL (the TeX language). All my .tex and .sty files are written in the TL. The TL is a programming language. TP is the compiler that translates my program (.tex + .sty) into binary form (.dvi). Now according to GPL, that would probably mean that if one .sty file is under GPL, the whole .dvi is under GPL, so also all the respective .tex files that are used to produce this .dvi are under GPL. Not that like to take this point of view and it is somehow questionable to consider a .dvi file as a (runnable) program, but it's a way of seeing this situation. Of course, I see it like you and wouldn't believe that the use of a GPL'd .sty file would mean GPL for my .tex file(s) if I distribute the .dvi. However, have you any argument against the above way of seeing the situation? It's just that I find it sometimes unpredictable how lawyers argue. Just a funny story here. Sorry, it's only in German. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Uhrzeit-ablesen-beim-Autofahren-ist-verbotene-Handynutzung-2498870.html I wonder what the judges had decided if the smartphone were smaller and looked more like a watch. Ralf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
