[Gnewsense-dev] Re: [bug #28597] TeX is missing

[Richard Stallman]

    - I do not agree that ams(la)tex's current license is nonfree.  To me,
      that needs a perverse misinterpretation of the author's intent.  The
      ams license text is the same as Knuth's, written many years ago,
      before the current quagmire of license interpretations: you can
      redistributed modified versions, but have to change the filename.

Indeed, that is acceptable in a free license.

Can someone please show me the entire license?  Maybe I can confirm it
is ok.

    - the chance of AMS using their scarce available time to re-release
      older versions with dual-licensing to placate Debian is essentially
      nil, IMHO.

What time do you think it requires?
All they have to do is give their approval.