Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([62.225.9.49]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:38:59 +0200 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g638cHxH005316 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:38:18 +0200 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g638QnT8011433; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:26:49 +0200 (MET DST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2226D.13471380" Received: from listserv (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id g633Ba3j004192; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:28:13 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 2646 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:28:12 +0200 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id g638SCxD005542 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:28:12 +0200 Received: from abel.math.umu.se (abel.math.umu.se [130.239.20.139]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g638QXWK015484 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:26:33 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [195.100.229.64] (du64-229.ppp.mh-anst.tninet.se [195.100.229.64]) by abel.math.umu.se (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id KAA21487 for ; Wed, 3 Jul 2002 10:25:42 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <15649.59650.511909.857636@istrati.mittelbach-online.de> References: <200206260556.g5Q5u4BJ027883@diziet.clawpaws.net> <3.0.6.32.20020621144417.007b3100@mail.uark.edu> <15639.26375.782098.164234@istrati.mittelbach-online.de> <3D17F428.20702@toshiba.co.jp> <15640.43741.596149.994860@istrati.mittelbach-online.de> Return-Path: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jul 2002 08:38:59.0163 (UTC) FILETIME=[135FF2B0:01C2226D] X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se x-mime-autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de id g638SCxD005543 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.6 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Suggested changes to LPPL Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 09:26:28 +0100 Message-ID: A X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: Suggested changes to LPPL Thread-Index: AcIibRPV4wVUCLy+R766JbIHwZJ11Q== From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lars_Hellstr=F6m?= To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4245 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2226D.13471380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 19.55 +0200 2002-07-02, Frank Mittelbach wrote: >Lars Hellstr=F6m writes: > > Concerning the matter of stating intent, perhaps something like the > > following could be included in the preamble? > > > > The purpose of this License is to grant The User the right to > > freely obtain, use, and make derivative works based on The = Program, > > whilst at the same time preserving the integrety of The Program. [snip] > >just reading the whole license again (helps sometimes :-) isn't the = above not >already covered by > > We, the LaTeX3 Project, believe that the conditions below give you > the freedom to make and distribute modified versions of The Program > that conform with whatever technical specifications you wish while > maintaining the availability, integrity, and reliability of > The Program. If you do not see how to achieve your goal while > meeting these conditions, then read the document `cfgguide.tex' > in the base LaTeX distribution for suggestions. Well, they do indeed express the same thing, but in different degrees of precision. The existing paragraph is sort of saying "We hope this legal document says ..." whereas the paragraph I suggested more takes the approach "This legal document should say that ...". If one is playing = the devil's advocate (and from your remarks it seems likely that the OSI has done this and will do so again) then it would be easy to see the = existing paragraph as completely void of any obligation and therefore ignore it, whereas (IMHO) a paragraph starting "The purpose of this license is ..." = at least gives a declaration of in what spirit the rest of the license = should be read. However, the following could be a sufficient improvement: The purpose of this License is to grant you, The User, the right to freely obtain, use, and make derivative works based on The Program, whilst at the same time preserving the integrety of The Program. We, the LaTeX3 Project, believe that the conditions below give you the freedom to make and distribute modified versions of The Program that conform with whatever technical specifications you wish while maintaining the availability, integrity, and reliability of The Program. If you do not see how to achieve your goal while meeting these conditions, then read the document `cfgguide.tex' in the base LaTeX distribution for suggestions. OTOH it now (after reading cfgguide.tex and modguide.tex) seems to me = that the reference to cfgguide above is really only useful in the case of = LPPL applied to LaTeX. Even in the case of LPPL applied to a LaTeX package, = it would make more sense to refer to modguide.tex. That document does = capture the spirit of it all, even though it could probably do with an update. Lars Hellstr=F6m ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2226D.13471380 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Suggested changes to LPPL

At 19.55 +0200 2002-07-02, Frank Mittelbach = wrote:
>Lars Hellstr=F6m writes:
> > Concerning the matter of stating intent, = perhaps something like the
> > following could be included in the = preamble?
> >
> >   The purpose of this License is = to grant The User the right to
> >   freely obtain, use, and make = derivative works based on The Program,
> >   whilst at the same time = preserving the integrety of The Program.
[snip]
>
>just reading the whole license again (helps = sometimes :-) isn't the above not
>already covered by
>
>  We, the LaTeX3 Project, believe that the = conditions below give you
>  the freedom to make and distribute = modified versions of The Program
>  that conform with whatever technical = specifications you wish while
>  maintaining the availability, integrity, = and reliability of
>  The Program.  If you do not see how = to achieve your goal while
>  meeting these conditions, then read the = document `cfgguide.tex'
>  in the base LaTeX distribution for = suggestions.

Well, they do indeed express the same thing, but in = different degrees of
precision. The existing paragraph is sort of saying = "We hope this legal
document says ..." whereas the paragraph I = suggested more takes the
approach "This legal document should say that = ...". If one is playing the
devil's advocate (and from your remarks it seems = likely that the OSI has
done this and will do so again) then it would be easy = to see the existing
paragraph as completely void of any obligation and = therefore ignore it,
whereas (IMHO) a paragraph starting "The purpose = of this license is ..." at
least gives a declaration of in what spirit the rest = of the license should
be read.

However, the following could be a sufficient = improvement:

  The purpose of this License is to grant you, = The User, the right to
  freely obtain, use, and make derivative works = based on The Program,
  whilst at the same time preserving the = integrety of The Program.
  We, the LaTeX3 Project, believe that the = conditions below give you
  the freedom to make and distribute modified = versions of The Program
  that conform with whatever technical = specifications you wish while
  maintaining the availability, integrity, and = reliability of
  The Program.  If you do not see how to = achieve your goal while
  meeting these conditions, then read the = document `cfgguide.tex'
  in the base LaTeX distribution for = suggestions.

OTOH it now (after reading cfgguide.tex and = modguide.tex) seems to me that
the reference to cfgguide above is really only useful = in the case of LPPL
applied to LaTeX. Even in the case of LPPL applied to = a LaTeX package, it
would make more sense to refer to modguide.tex. That = document does capture
the spirit of it all, even though it could probably = do with an update.

Lars Hellstr=F6m

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2226D.13471380--