[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[task #16088] Submission of datestamp

From: निरंजन
Subject: [task #16088] Submission of datestamp
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 22:18:50 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:93.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/93.0

Follow-up Comment #23, task #16088 (project administration):


I will split my comment in three parts:

1. My package isn't LPPL'ed. I was releasing it with GPLv3 only.

2. As far as I understand it (I might be wrong); the kernel is loaded at every
compile from 2020+. Even the next part of your comment sounded a bit strange
to me. Let's say I have source-code for program `i' stored in file `'
written in language `xyz'. Now the `' needs to be compiled with the xyz
compiler in order to get `i.pqr' file which is our actual `program' that runs.
As far as I understand it, without the compiler one wouldn't get the program.
So how is the source-code not dependent on the compiler? In the LaTeX-scenario
if the kernel is loaded (and loading it is a strict requirement) at every
compile, then why won't you call it a dependency?

3. This part is related to my analysis of the dependencies (as I understand
them) of my package.

The following is a minimal code-snippet demonstrating the use of my package:

\listfiles % Required for listing files


If I compile this program with LuaLaTeX, I get a list of files _required_ by
the program. As soon as I load a package by the \usepackage command, I call
for some packages. The list is as follows:

 *File List*
 article.cls    2021/10/04 v1.4n Standard LaTeX document class
  size10.clo    2021/10/04 v1.4n Standard LaTeX file (size option)
datestamp.sty    2021/10/22 v0.1 Fixed date-stamps with LuaLaTeX.
  xparse.sty    2021-11-12 L3 Experimental document command parser
   expl3.sty    2021-11-22 L3 programming layer (loader) 
l3backend-luatex.def    2021-10-18 L3 backend support: PDF output (LuaTeX)
  ts1cmr.fd    2019/12/16 v2.5j Standard LaTeX font definitions

If I don't have one of these file, the compiler will complain about the
respective file being absent. Now in my understanding this is clearly a
dependency. Now if you check the licenses of the above mentioned files, almost
all of them are LPPL'ed which in my opinion was the biggest problem. Now I
would love to see how the Savannah community thinks about it. Even though my
packages are refused and this package is soon to be removed, I would like to
hear your comments.

PS: `datestamp' got approval on `Puszcza'! Yayy :)


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]