[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In the real world communications between well-intentioned parties are > never perfect. A license such as yours has advantages (preventing a > morass of slightly different versions with conflicting filenames so > user don't know which is which) but imposes a burden on packagers and > authors.
It also has more disadvantages. Thinking it over, I can't figure out under which license I may and/or must distribute a derivative work which I created and renamed. If csplain were under GPL, it's clear: It must be GPL. But it isn't under the GPL, and the license it is under doesn't state clearly which license derivatives are supposed to use. I obviously can't use the same license text (because "same name 'csplain'" would be self-contradictory). Am I obligded to replace 'csplain" by my new name? Or am I allowed to drop it? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich Debian Developer (teTeX)
