From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Proposal for an Emacs User Survey Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 22:08:46 +0300 Message-ID: <20201016190846.GI11061@protected.rcdrun.com> References: <20201013052736.GE31408@protected.rcdrun.com> <20201016130235.06218dae@argon> <20201016142436.187b8210@argon> <20201016152523.6fdfef65@argon> <6142a27f-c53b-35bf-1038-5f047395e868@yandex.ru> <20201016204531.77fab05b@argon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5415"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/1.14.0 (2020-05-02) Cc: emacs-devel , Richard Stallman , Thibaut Verron , Dmitry Gutov To: Marcel Ventosa Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 16 21:13:35 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kTVAV-0001IV-Te for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 21:13:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51736 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kTVAU-0006PO-NJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:13:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60784) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kTV6A-0004uQ-SR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:09:06 -0400 Original-Received: from static.rcdrun.com ([95.85.24.50]:56055) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kTV68-0005RJ-9i; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:09:06 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.210.154.50]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by static.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 00000000002A0B3F.000000005F89EFCD.000066EA; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 19:09:00 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201016204531.77fab05b@argon> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.85.24.50; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=static.rcdrun.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/16 12:33:49 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:257851 Archived-At: * Marcel Ventosa [2020-10-16 16:45]: > I've noticed a trend of speaking about Emacs and other free software > projects as if they were "commodities" and "products," but as I see > them, it is precisely because they are community driven projects that > they are not "commodities" or "products". My opinion is that Emacs is a product, and it is software commodity as well. Definitions from Wordnet here below like 1. maybe 2, and 5 do apply, it is product in few definitions. It has been sold for money in past through GNU project, which is totally alright, and is probably sold even today, I just don't know where. If product is community driven, it still remains product. There is nothing wrong with that word or calling it a product, because it is, major and significant free software product made by Emacs developers. * Overview of noun product The noun product has 6 senses (first 4 from tagged texts) 1. (52) merchandise, ware, product -- (commodities offered for sale; "good business depends on having good merchandise"; "that store offers a variety of products") 2. (25) product, production -- (an artifact that has been created by someone or some process; "they improve their product every year"; "they export most of their agricultural production") 3. (8) product, mathematical product -- (a quantity obtained by multiplication; "the product of 2 and 3 is 6") 4. (2) product -- (a chemical substance formed as a result of a chemical reaction; "a product of lime and nitric acid") 5. product -- (a consequence of someone's efforts or of a particular set of circumstances; "skill is the product of hours of practice"; "his reaction was the product of hunger and fatigue") 6. intersection, product, Cartesian product -- (the set of elements common to two or more sets; "the set of red hats is the intersection of the set of hats and the set of red things") > > I think it's both insulting to its developers, and stinks of thought > > police. Far from the idea of user freedom I hope to expect from > > GNU and FSF. It is not important if somebody cals it a product, what is important is if the distributor or seller provides license with it and gives same rights to its buyers or users. > I don't understand how refusing to draw attention to a repository that > recommends proprietary software turns anyone into the "thought > police". It is "proprietary thought police" and there is nothing wrong with it. Even the thought police will not say there is anything wrong with thought police. :-p So when we distribute free software, we tend to speak out against proprietary software being distributed or promoted together with free software. In that sense we are policing various free software repositories and speaking out publicly against, or denouncing, the inclusion, usage, and dangers of proprietary software. So, next time somebody thinks of proprietary software, just remember, we are watching... slap on fingers. > In fact, one of the most worrying aspects of this survey idea, as I see > it, is the suggested use of non-free Javascript to implement it. Idea about Emacs survey is alright, only that awareness of free software has yet to arrive to those who initiated the survey, as they proposed using Google Spreadsheet and similar, which would in fact put Emacs users at direct risk.