Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([62.225.9.49]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.4905); Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:28:36 +0200 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g6H8SCWi022935 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:28:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C22D6B.F1B95200" Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g6H83eWK016927; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:03:40 +0200 (MET DST) 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 g6GM04xC006287; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:04:42 +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 7617 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:04:42 +0200 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (relay2.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.210.211]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id g6H84WrU008368 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:04:32 +0200 Received: from smtp.wanadoo.es ([62.37.236.142]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id g6H83UT8005042 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:03:30 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [62.36.68.102] (62-36-68-102.dialup.uni2.es [62.36.68.102]) by smtp.wanadoo.es (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6H82V011490 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 10:02:31 +0200 In-Reply-To: <15668.40016.278313.982907@istrati.mittelbach-online.de> Return-Path: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jul 2002 08:28:36.0202 (UTC) FILETIME=[F1D824A0:01C22D6B] User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2106 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.6 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: forwarded message from Walter Landry Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:04:10 +0100 Message-ID: A X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: forwarded message from Walter Landry Thread-Index: AcIta/IGw62d8U2VS4KWqPpebU/7ig== From: "Javier Bezos" To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4316 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C22D6B.F1B95200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Here is a hypothetical. Let's say that someone wants to add support = for > Klingon into Latex. So they hack something together which, by = necessity, > changes a few standard files, and it works for them without breaking = anything > else. You reject the patch because it isn't really a good i18n = solution, it > only works for Klingon. You also think that Klingon is a silly thing = to add > support for, so you'll probably never add it in. However, for the = people > interested in writing Klingon (e.g. Hollywood screen writers and trek = fan > fiction writers), this is a good solution. In this case, you are = preventing > people from having seamless support for Klingon. > [Note. Instead of sendind this message to the Debian list, I going to = send it to this list only. Reuse the argument if you want.] This is a really good argument in favour of LPPL! If someone adds = support to Klingon by modifying the LaTeX kernel, the resulting documents will have = a restricted distribution because they won't compile correctly in other systems. This is an _actual_ restriction. But if instead a package with = a different name is created, the document will complain about a required = but missing package and you will be able to locate and get the package, and typeset the document. Otherwise, you will be frustrated because you have = a 'correct' document displaying nothing without any explanation. I think = it's important to note that LaTeX is an open system entirely written in TeX = and that the macros defined in the LaTeX kernel are *freely* redefinable by means of packages (which usually is not posible in other programming languages). Javier ------_=_NextPart_001_01C22D6B.F1B95200 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: forwarded message from Walter Landry

> Here is a hypothetical.  Let's say that = someone wants to add support for
> Klingon into Latex.  So they hack something = together which, by necessity,
> changes a few standard files, and it works for = them without breaking anything
> else.  You reject the patch because it = isn't really a good i18n solution, it
> only works for Klingon.  You also think = that Klingon is a silly thing to add
> support for, so you'll probably never add it = in.  However, for the people
> interested in writing Klingon (e.g. Hollywood = screen writers and trek fan
> fiction writers), this is a good solution.  = In this case, you are preventing
> people from having seamless support for = Klingon.
>

[Note. Instead of sendind this message to the Debian = list, I going to send
it to this list only. Reuse the argument if you = want.]

This is a really good argument in favour of LPPL! If = someone adds support to
Klingon by modifying the LaTeX kernel, the resulting = documents will have a
restricted distribution because they won't compile = correctly in other
systems. This is an _actual_ restriction. But if = instead a package with a
different name is created, the document will complain = about a required but
missing package and you will be able to locate and = get the package, and
typeset the document. Otherwise, you will be = frustrated because you have a
'correct' document displaying nothing without any = explanation. I think it's
important to note that LaTeX is an open system = entirely written in TeX and
that the macros defined in the LaTeX kernel are = *freely* redefinable by
means of packages (which usually is not posible in = other programming
languages).

Javier

------_=_NextPart_001_01C22D6B.F1B95200--