Hilmar Preuße <hill...@web.de> wrote: > On 15.03.09 Frank Küster (fr...@debian.org) wrote: >> Francesco Poli <f...@firenze.linux.it> wrote: > > Hi! > >> > Is there any progress on obtaining >> > /usr/share/common-licenses/LPPL-1.3 ? >> >> None at all AFAIK. Or have you submitted a bug, Hilmar? >> > http://bugs.debian.org/481491
Thank you! > However the policy maintainers weren't really convinced to include > LPPL-1.3 into the policy, AFAICT. Please have a look at that bug, > status is "Under Discussion". Well, I must say that this argument is convincing to me: ,---- | However, this doesn't sound like it qualifies IMO. The reason is that | while TeX Live consists of a lot of packages, there are many | installations where none of them are installed. Putting them in | /usr/share/common-licenses means it is also installed on embedded system | which are really short on storage (and which will certainly not install | any TeX packages). | | A license should only be in /usr/share/common-licenses if it is hard to | image a system which doesn't have any package under that license | installed. How to measure that is obviously a problem. :-) `---- And that would mean that we don't get LPPL in /usr/share/common-licenses. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Debian Developer (TeXLive) VCD Aschaffenburg-Miltenberg, ADFC Miltenberg B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org