[tex-live] Packages with non-free catalogue-license

[Robin Fairbairns]

Ulrich Mueller <ulm at gentoo.org> wrote:

> Forwarding Gentoo bug <https://bugs.gentoo.org/436698>.
> 
> We've noticed that several packages that are included with TeX Live
> 2012 are labelled with a non-free catalogue-license in texlive.tlpdb.
> 
> noinfo:
>    amsmath-it

the readme states that the package is to be licensed as the original
amsmath

>    ascii-chart

clear statement of lppl in the .tex file

>    borceux

README offers a statement somewhat like pd (i.e., do what you like)

>    breakcites

README offers a statement somewhat like pd (i.e., do what you like)

>    cherokee

likewise, in cherokee.mf,.sty

>    eiad

Clea Rees obained permission to insert a pd statement in the .mf files

... and so on.

i've spent ages working with debian and redhat people on all these
licence issues.

not all the licence statements that we document in the catalogue are
what i would call "perfectly characterised", but the details are all
there in the publicly-accessible svn copy (that has no author details,
for confidentiality reasons).

if you want to reject things that we have worked over and accepted among
ourselves, that's your look-out.  however, if you've nothing better
than a list ...

[sorry -- draft posted as a result of finger trouble at this point]

... of things with no statement of why you imagine our analysis is
wrong, then i, for one, won't pay any further attention.

Robin Fairbairns

Of, but not necessarily speaking for, the CTAN team