Re: Debian teTeX (was: Re: Saving space...)

Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> writes:

> Besides these explanations I don't think anyone in Debian really
> wants to loose TeX. If you read the comment after section 4 of the
> Debian Free Software Guidelines you notice that the intention is
> _not_ to make as many programs as possible non-free (the "different
> name" sentence was made to make it possible to consider programs
> like TeX to be free software).

Nobody wants to lose TeX?  Care to explain the finish of
<URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/debian-legal-200207/msg00486.html>
then?

> > > Life is too short for fooling around with license arguments!
> > 
> > Tell that to the courts...  however, life may well be too short
> > for fooling around with Debian-legal.
> 
> Please don't use a @gnu.org address when making such statements.

I don't see why I should change my Email address for stating my
opinion with regard to free software (actually, when I got the Email
account there I asked whether this came with any political obligations
for its usage).

You are aware that, as opposed to Debian, Richard Stallman has
acknowledged both TeX as well as LaTeX under the LPPL as free
software?

The steadfast refusal of Debian to accept the LPPL as a free software
licence for more than a temporary duration and their constant threats
to revoke the free software status from LaTeX altogether has lead to
several changes in the LPPL.

Personally, I find the last draft version I saw, which was essentially
created for the sake of placating Debian-legal, a bit overdone on the
matter of legalese for my taste.  If a less complicated version could
be agreed upon, this might give users and authors in the long run less
of a headache.

It would be a definite pity if TeX and/or LaTeX should get removed
from the major community-driven Linux distribution.  I would be
tempted to not just blame Knuth and the LaTeX project team, should
that happen.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum