From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Adding advisory notification for non-ELPA package.el downloads Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 17:20:51 +0300 Message-ID: <834lu7b35o.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1500553768.497130.1046984072.1622AF4D@webmail.messagingengine.com> <837ez3b4yd.fsf@gnu.org> <1500559308.516260.1047108888.2750C01A@webmail.messagingengine.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1500560806 3512 195.159.176.226 (20 Jul 2017 14:26:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 14:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Rankin Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 20 16:26:42 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dYCPa-0000cj-4K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:26:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38302 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYCPf-0004rY-4r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:26:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41260) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYCKG-0008R2-IG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:21:15 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYCKB-00080n-UE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:21:12 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:58575) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dYCKB-00080M-PO; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:21:07 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4385 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dYCK4-0002Rz-Oq; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:21:01 -0400 In-reply-to: <1500559308.516260.1047108888.2750C01A@webmail.messagingengine.com> (message from Paul Rankin on Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:01:48 +1000) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:216892 Archived-At: > From: Paul Rankin > Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 00:01:48 +1000 > > On Thu, 20 Jul 2017, at 11:42 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > I think you might misunderstand the nature and the essence of the > > copyright assignment: it doesn't in any way diminish the author's > > rights on his/her code. Here's a direct citation from > > > > https://www.fsf.org/bulletin/2014/spring/copyright-assignment-at-the-fsf > > > > Sometimes contributors are concerned about giving up rights to their > > work. As the assignment is a gift to the free software community, > > they don't want it to come at the expense of having flexibility in > > the use of their own code. Thus, we grant back to contributors a > > license to use their work as they see fit. This means they are free > > to modify, share, and sublicense their own work under terms of their > > choice. This enables contributors to redistribute their work under > > another free software license. While this technically also permits > > distributing their work under a proprietary license, we hope they > > won't. > > > > I can confirm that every one of my assignments I got back signed by > > the FSF includes a specific clause about the above rights granted back > > to me. > > Eli you've missed the point completely. Maybe so, but then how about explaining what I missed? >From my POV, you expressed a concern about giving up the rights for your code, and I pointed out that by assigning you don't give up any rights. Given that Clément pointed out the "Author" and/or "Written by" records in the sources, what other concerns remain?