KTUGFaq
KTUG FAQ
FrontPage › CommonLicenses
ÀúÀÛÀÚ°¡ Ưº°È÷ ¶óÀ̼±½º¿¡ °üÇÑ ¾ð±ÞÀ» ÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù¸é ºñ·Ï ÀÎÅÍ³Ý»ó¿¡ ¿Ã·ÁµÐ ¹®¼¶óÇصµ Àç¹èÆ÷°¡ ±ÝÁöµÈ´Ù°í Çؼ®ÇØ¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. ´Ù¸¸ °øÁ¤ÀÌ¿ëÀÇ ¹ý¸®»ó °³ÀÎÀû ¿µ¿ª ¾È¿¡¼´Â ÀÚÀ¯·ÎÀÌ º¹Á¦ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù.
[ÆíÁý]
LPPL ¶
The LaTeX Project Public License 1.3 2003-12-01 °³Á¤ÆÇ
The LaTeX Project Public License 1.2
¿ø·¡ LPPLÀº ¼öÁ¤ÆÇÀÇ ¹èÆ÷¿¡ ÀÖ¾î ÆÄÀÏÀ̸§ º¯°æÀ» ¿ä±¸ÇÏ¿´À¸³ª °³Á¤µÈ 1.3¿¡¼´Â ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¿ä±¸¸¦ ¹ß°ßÇÒ ¼ö ¾ø´Ù.
[ÆíÁý]
GPL ¶
GNU General Public License
GPLÀÇ Çѱ¹¾î ¹ø¿ª ±×·¯³ª Çѱ¹¾î ¹ø¿ªÆÇÀº ¾ÆÁ÷ °ø½ÄÀûÀÎ ¹ýÀû ¹®¼·Î¼ÀÇ ÁöÀ§¸¦ ÀÎÁ¤¹ÞÁö ¸øÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù.
ÁÖ¿äƯ¡Àº ¹èÆ÷¿¡ ÀÖ¾î ¼Ò½º°¡ °ø°³µÇ¾î¾ß ÇÏ°í, GPL ÀúÀÛ¹°ÀÇ ÆÄ»ý¹°(¹ýÀûÀ¸·Î´Â 2Â÷Àû ÀúÀÛ¹°À̶ó ºÎ¸¥´Ù)µµ ¿ª½Ã GPL ¶óÀ̼±½º¸¦ ÃëÇØ¾ß ÇÑ´Ù´Â Á¡ÀÌ´Ù.
[ÆíÁý]
Discussion ¶
from comp.text.tex, David Carlisle wrote: LPPL and GPL
Main differences
1) This licences forces a change of file name on modified code
We consider this essential for an implementation that is defining
the language of communication as in LaTeX. You can talk of a better
implementation of a C compiler, but you can't talk of a better
implementation of LaTeX. As I know to my cost, if you add \relax
to a latex command, some document, somewhere will break.
You can of course take latex and build a better _something_ just don't call it latex.
GPL does not have this feature.
2) LPPL allows code to be used in essentially all the places that TeX
You can of course take latex and build a better _something_ just don't call it latex.
GPL does not have this feature.
may be used. This would not be the case for GPL, which could cause
problems on some of the commercial TeX systems.
3) GPL has a certain virus quality of forcing all derivatives to
be GPL. LPPL is less aggressive (and actually therefore less secure
in some ways) it does not force derivatives to be LPPL, just forces
that they are not named to the original filenames.
Apart from that they are just _different_ you can not say that one
licence is a supperset of the other. There are some things that you
can do under both licences, some just under GPL, some just under LPPL,
and things would not be allowed by either licence.
Richard Stallman (author of GPL) has been involved in discussions with
this licence (and the original legal.txt one on which it is based)
and does accept that this licence qualifies as `free software' in the
sense understood by the FSF and the GNU project.
HLaTeXÀÇ ¶óÀ̼¾½º´Â GNU GPL·Î ¸í½ÃµÈ °ÍÀ¸·Î ¾Ð´Ï´Ù.
°³ÀÎÀûÀÎ ÀÇ°ßÀ¸·Î´Â, Àß ¸ð¸£Áö¸¸, HLaTeX ÀÚü´Â GPLÀÌ´õ¶óµµ hangul.sty¿Í hfont.sty, hfont.tex ¿¡ ´ëÇؼ´Â LPPLÀ̾ú¾î¾ß ÇÏÁö ¾Ê´Â°¡, ¶ó´Â °ÍÀε¥, ÀÌ Á¡¿¡ ´ëÇؼ ¾îÂî »ý°¢ÇϽôÂÁö ¿©Â庸°í ½Í½À´Ï´Ù.
Àº±¤Èñ ¼±»ý´Ô²²¼ HLaTeXÀ» GPLÀ̶ó ÇϽŠ°ÍÀÌ ÀϹÝÀûÀÎ Àǹ̿¡¼ "ÀÚÀ¯¼ÒÇÁÆ®¿þ¾î"¶ó´Â Àǹ̷Π¸»¾¸ÇϽŠ°ÍÀÎÁö ¾Æ´Ï¸é GNU GPLÀÇ (À̸¥¹Ù virus feature±îÁö Æ÷ÇÔÇÑ ºñ±³Àû) ¾ö°ÝÇÑ ¹ýÀû ¿ä°ÇÀ» °í·ÁÇϼż GPLÀ̶ó ÇϽŠ°ÍÀÎÁö´Â °³ÀÎÀûÀ¸·Î ¿©Â庸¾Æ¾ß°Ú³×¿ä.
GPL¿¡¼ LPPL ÆÄ»ý¹°Àº ¿øÄ¢ÀûÀ¸·Î ºÒ°¡´ÉÇÑ °ÍÀΰ¡¿ä? LPPL¿¡¼ GPL ÆÄ»ý¹°Àº °¡´ÉÇÑ °ÍÀÌÁö¿ä? ---Karnes
GPLÀ» LPPL·Î ¶óÀ̼±½º º¯°æÇϱâ À§Çؼ´Â ¿øÀúÀÛÀÚÀÎ Àº±¤Èñ´ÔÀÇ Çã¶ôÀÌ ÀÖ¾î¾ß ÇÑ´Ù°í º¾´Ï´Ù. LPPL¿¡¼ GPL·Î º¯°æÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ¿øÀúÀÛÀÚ Çã¶ôÀÌ ¾ø´õ¶óµµ LPPLÀÌ ¿ä±¸ÇÏ´Â ÀÏÁ¤ÇÑ ¿ä°ÇÀÌ °®Ãß¾îÁø´Ù¸é °¡´ÉÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀ»±î ÇÕ´Ï´Ù. ¸ðµÎ ÀúÀÇ °³ÀÎÀû ÀÇ°ßÀÏ »Ó, ¹ýÀûÀÎ °á·ÐÀº ¹°·Ð ¾Æ´Õ´Ï´Ù. --DohyunKim