Request for review: latex-prosper
Ed Hill
ed at eh3.com
Wed Jun 1 14:21:46 UTC 2005
On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 00:25 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 00:06 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 04:32 +0100, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I will try to review it better tomorrow. Meanwhile see for example, the
> > > specfile of tetex-bytefield available in the Extras repo.
> >
> > OK - other than the license thing being discussed, I *think* I've
> > covered everything.
>
> http://mpeters.us/fc_extras/tetex-prosper-1.00.4-0.2.src.rpm
> http://mpeters.us/fc_extras/tetex-prosper.spec
>
> (tired, going to bed now ...)
Hi Michael,
Yes, it does all appear to be fixed -- except for the license. ;-)
And I apologize for saying it should be BSD because, as Ignacio pointed
out, it is indeed more similar to an MIT license. And yes, Jose did
have two good points (#2 & #3 in his original email) about how to
improve the package but he completely misunderstood the licensing
issue--its clearly not LPPL.
So, please change the license to "MIT" and if no one has any further
comments I'll send an approval later today.
Ed
--
Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com
URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/
phone: 617-253-0098
fax: 617-253-4464
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list