[tex-live] TL: fancytooltips (again), schedule, yplan

Zdenek Wagner zdenek.wagner at gmail.com
Tue Sep 9 12:35:07 CEST 2008

2008/9/9 Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <mpg at elzevir.fr>:
> Robin Fairbairns a écrit :
>> it may be that this claim was inserted automatically by an the version
>> of docstrip current at in
> No version of docstrip that I know of inserts a "may not distribute"
> statement. (Doesn't mean that actually no version of docstrip does it,
> but it would indeed surprise me). Anyway, the test is clear: strip the
> dtx again with a recent version of docstrip and see what remains of the
> "licence statement".
This was in LPPL and thus in docstrip some 15 years ago. Maybe I still
have it somewhere in my almost ancient emTeX installation in my OS/2
computer. It explicitelly asked for distribution of .dtx, not .sty and
other generated files.

> Anyway, the very notion of docstrip default headers stating anything in
> terms of licence is madness. IMO, docstrip defaults headers should just
> be:  "This file was generated from XXX.dtx with docstrip. See the source
> file for licence information."  I know this adds some more work, but i
> may be good to keep a list of packages with this problem in order to ask
> the latex team about it again. I'm not sure they realise how many files
> are concerned.
> By the way, half jokingly, one could interpret the "decision" of the
> author keeping the docstrip default headers as "I hereby place this
> document under the licence the LaTeX team choose for the docstrip defaut
> headers to state, this version or,  at your option, any later version."
> Now the l3 team would have the power to free a lot of packages by just
> changing docstrip's defaut headers to any free licence :-)
> Manuel.

Zdeněk Wagner

More information about the tex-live mailing list