[tex-live] free software, DFSG
kasal at ucw.cz
Fri Jun 4 15:47:36 CEST 2004
On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 01:25:35PM +0100, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> >Does that mean eTeX has to go?
> no, in that case we throw out the original :-}
of course I understand the joke but perhaps it's not wise to say such
The tendencies to be "holier than Stallman" cause bad perception of free
software community and confuse people. Only a few hours ago I thought
that Knuth's licence is not free.
Karl had to explain it to me:
> That's incorrect. The "Knuth license" where something must be renamed
> before it can be modified, is free software according to the FSF. (Not
> GPL-compatible, but that's a different story.) This is implicit because
> rms has always said that the GNU system will (and does) include TeX. He
> also stated that the LPPL (even the first version) was free software.
> Not that I'm saying he likes or recommends the "must rename" licenses;
> he doesn't. But he still considers them free.
> I agree with Sebastian that the "must rename" license is problematic in
> practice and does not actually prevent any abuses. However, it is still
> free (and I didn't see anything from Sebastian stating the contrary).
During the hot discussion in cstex list I mentioned in my earlier mails,
someone said that he is afraid that free sw community will come with a
TNT (TNT's not TeX) as an echt-free replacement for TeX.
That's why I think these times are not good for such jokes...
Have a nice day,
More information about the tex-live