Bob Tennent wrote: > Dear all: I propose to incorporate the definitions in these "extension > libraries" into musixtex.tex. The reason is that Karl Berry, ever-vigilant > for possible file-name clashes in TeXLive, feels the file names are too > "generic" and I've only been allowed to put them into the musixtex package > in the doc/addons directory, which is not the appropriate location in a > texmf tree. > > The macros are relatively small and already documented in the musixdoc > document. George Sicherman has given me his approval for tuplet. I haven't > been able to reach Mthimkhulu Molekwa for curly but I see that Rainer > Dunker has incorporated musixbar code by Molekwa in musixdbr.tex, > apparently without provoking an objection.
A quick search online for licensing questions regarding TeX packages seems to show that the typical answer is "off-topic" :o) That said, IANAL, but curly.tex's redefinition of \writ@staffs I think gives sufficient case it must be GPL in order to comply with MusiXTeX's licence. Out of curiosity, why can't they simply be renamed (e.g. musixcurly and musixtuplet, or something?) and given proper headers like other MusiXTeX modules? David ------------------------------- [email protected] mailing list If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archives, go to http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
