[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack
From: |
Karl Goetz |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack |
Date: |
Wed, 5 Aug 2009 10:11:02 +0930 |
On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 21:37:21 +0200
Sam Geeraerts <address@hidden> wrote:
> Benedikt Ahrens schreef:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I finally received an answer to my request to the AMS. Their
Thanks for taking this on.
> >
> > I won't be available during the next two weeks. The answer came from
Starting when - are you going to see these replies? :)
> > (******************************)
> >
> > Dear Benedikt,
> >
> > The good news is that as we release new versions of our packages, we
> > have been updating the license to the following:
> >
> > % Unlimited copying and redistribution of this file are
> > permitted as % long as this file is not modified. Modifications,
> > and distribution % of modified versions, are permitted, but only if
> > the resulting file % is renamed.
> >
> > We considered adopting the LPPL, but decided that the ban against
> > distributed modified files under the same name was critical to our
> > business interests. This wording, which was suggested by Karl Berry
> > to address similar licensing concerns for TeXLive, will be used for
> > all future releases.
>
> "... Modifications, and ..." sounds a bit like a EULA and rather
> unnecessary. It probably falls outside copyright law, which makes it
> irrelevant. (Either that, or it makes the whole license invalid,
> although I doubt that.) As far as I can tell it's a free license. And
> Karl Berry is a good reference, I think.
If AMS isn't playing Chinese whispers. (see below)
> > What we could do, if it would help, is add a 00LICENSE file to the
> > current distribution that contains the new license, an explanation
> > of the situation, and a statement that this supersedes the one in
> > the individual files. I suspect that strictly speaking this is
> > legally dicey, but it would certainly make our intentions clear.
>
> AMS probably own all the code, so I think this is legally sound and
> good enough for our purposes. It would be good to check with the FSF
> licensing lab, though.
I'd agree with this, especially to confirm Karl B. said what AMS claim
he said.
> If these things are in order, then we need to check if an updated
> package can just replace the current one. Meaning:
>
> 1) Will there be a deb package available (soon)?
If its a simple matter of inserting a new copyright file, it could
happen a day or two after we get said file.
> 2) Will it have different dependencies from the current one?
If we need to re-package it yes, if its just a copyright notice, all
should be fine.
> 3) Will it be so different that it could break building current other
> packages (e.g. doxygen, as mentioned in the Debian bug report)?
That would be un-fun.
> > I hope that this is, if not completely satisfactory, at least
> > workable. If you have any further questions or concerns, please let
> > me know and I'll do my best to address them.
> >> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477060
> >> [2] http://www.gnewsense.org
> >> [3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=477060#20
>
> Thanks for contacting them. If you feel like also informing Debian
> about this, I'm sure they'd appreciate it.
Definitely. If Benedikt has gone on his break I'll send the info on to
Debian and see what -legal thinks (and open new bug(s) if needed).
kk
--
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Benedikt Ahrens, 2009/08/04
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Sam Geeraerts, 2009/08/04
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack,
Karl Goetz <=
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Karl Goetz, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Sam Geeraerts, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Karl Goetz, 2009/08/06
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Sam Geeraerts, 2009/08/12
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Karl Goetz, 2009/08/13
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Russell Currey, 2009/08/13
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Benedikt Ahrens, 2009/08/13
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Sam Geeraerts, 2009/08/13
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Benedikt Ahrens, 2009/08/18
- Re: [Gnewsense-dev] Another tex package (texlive-base) to hack, Karl Goetz, 2009/08/19