Norbert Preining prein...@logic.at wrote:
Hi everyone,
1) Include that license in debian/copyright, document which part it
applies to.
Just to make one thing clear. *I* will not go down this road. I will
*never* collect the license statements 15000+ files.
[...]
I take the license
On Mo, 01 Aug 2011, Frank Küster wrote:
Please don't overreact. Upstream has a fine mechanism to record
licenses of packages and even individual files, and all we need to do is
Individual packages, yes, individual files, no.
to find someone with write access to The Catalogue (like you or me)
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 12:57:21PM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote:
On Mo, 01 Aug 2011, Frank Küster wrote:
Please don't overreact. Upstream has a fine mechanism to record
licenses of packages and even individual files, and all we need to do is
Individual packages, yes, individual files, no.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:02:39PM +0200, Frank Küster wrote:
Lionel Elie Mamane lio...@mamane.lu wrote:
So I'm out of ideas how to find the real sources.
Given that the true sources seem to have disappeared,
Hm, just googling for ucs.dtx (...)
Now, why didn't that cross my mind is a fair
On Do, 28 Jul 2011, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
Now, with what Norbert said (will not bother about fixing a single
LaTeX package) if we get Wolfgang Jeltsch to upload to CTAN *now*,
then it will be in TeXlive 2012, so in.. wheezy+1, because wheezy will
And it will end up also in the TL2011
Hi!
Am 26.07.2011 12:27, schrieb Lionel Elie Mamane:
[..]
Given that the true sources seem to have disappeared, I suppose we
could consider the .sty file to be its own source; it is a stretch,
but removing unicode support for (La)TeX would be rather
... damaging. I really, really vote for
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 07:21:39PM +0200, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
Am 26.07.2011 12:27, schrieb Lionel Elie Mamane:
Given that the true sources seem to have disappeared, I suppose we
could consider the .sty file to be its own source; it is a stretch,
but removing unicode support for
Hi everyone,
1) Include that license in debian/copyright, document which part it
applies to.
Just to make one thing clear. *I* will not go down this road. I will *never*
collect the license statements 15000+ files.
If you want this, please remove TeX from Debian and all will be happy.
I
Lionel Elie Mamane lio...@mamane.lu wrote:
clone 635382 -1
retitle 635382 latex-unicode sources and licensing
severity 635382 serious
thanks
Thank you for your work.
So I'm out of ideas how to find the real sources.
Given that the true sources seem to have disappeared,
Hm, just
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:01:21AM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
ucshyper.sty, which says it is generated from ucs.dtx, but does not
contain ucs.dtx. So
2) This looks like an RC bug to me, not shipping the preferred form
for modification in the source package.
Additionally, browsing
clone 635382 -1
retitle 635382 latex-unicode sources and licensing
severity 635382 serious
thanks
Cloning bug to separate the issues.
*New* bug is about the check for pdf mode in ucshyper.sty, and #635382
is about the availability of sources and license of ucshyper.
In the rest of this email,
11 matches
Mail list logo
