unofficial mirror of emacs-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* On Bug #49065 and commercial-emacs
@ 2024-10-03  2:33 divya
  2024-10-03  7:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: divya @ 2024-10-03  2:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Emacs Devel

Hello Emacs Devel,

I stumbled upon the huge patch in #49065 just after discovering 
`commercial-emacs`. I have two concerns:

- There hasn't been any work in reviewing the patch, and I want to give 
it a shot. Especially the parts concerning Gnus.

- The writing in README of commercial-emacs repository, sounds weird if 
not hostile?

> Ah, but if it could reach those heights. If by some miracle it did, the 
> choices for the FSF are the same as before: enlist RMS to embark on a 
> coding frenzy that achieves feature parity, grant myself commit rights, 
> or continue not noticing me. If my history of user acquisition is any 
> indication, the last outcome is most likely.

https://shmelpa.commandlinesystems.com/

What is the cause for this hostility? From what I'm able to see in the 
discussion after the patch was posted, the maintainers basically asked 
dick to divide the huge patch into smaller pieces so that it is feasible 
to review and merge it. I have seen no signs of hostility, so I do not 
understand this gesture of forking and saying rudely that FSF would be 
racing for feature parity or something. Maybe I'm getting this wrongly, 
but it does feel a bit arrogant.

Also, are there any license/copyright issues if one could get their 
patch merged? From what I understand, there shouldn't be, since the 
patch was made to Emacs and the fork also is GPL.

Moreover, from the site:

> This is the oft ideated, never sublimated “forge” repository for emacs. 
> As it is hosted on a site using non-free software, the work herein is 
> not the official GNU Emacs source, and does not entreat the FSF to 
> enforce its license.

GPL enforces all derivatives to also be copyleft, as it should, to 
ensure that the libre nature of the software doesn't get removed. So, 
what does "does not entreat the FSF to enforce its license" mean?

I would like to begin work on this patch within a week or so, and would 
have a lot of questions for the maintainers and, of course, Lars.

Regards,

Divya Ranjan
Mathematics, Philosophy and Libre Software.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-10-05 20:18 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-10-03  2:33 On Bug #49065 and commercial-emacs divya
2024-10-03  7:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2024-10-03  8:08   ` Divya
2024-10-04 10:58 ` James Thomas
2024-10-04 23:49   ` Divya Ranjan
2024-10-05 20:18     ` Manuel Giraud via Emacs development discussions.
2024-10-04 23:06 ` Björn Bidar
     [not found] ` <87v7y7jwmw.fsf@>
2024-10-04 23:59   ` Divya Ranjan

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).