From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Help testing emacs-28.3-rc1.tar.gz on MS-Windows
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 14:40:20 +0300
Message-ID: <83bkeztie3.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <CADwFkm=N5=zWnQkP+jMZ3jG7OgzyJU6B84rNvajopS5jaD6HDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <87mt59lq8s.fsf@moondust.localdomain>
 <CADwFkmnwgozmwEWvD4WtQMYT6Lf8iOc3yTNEchXNLqerZnVKhQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <83r0ulwvhz.fsf@gnu.org>
 <CADwFkmku4g_paBjGbBdexjMEay8YKWj=cP3D9X2Fwmj7BvZvpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CCE46F99-8AB5-4479-9D42-32FEC15E018A@gmail.com>
 <E1pYfcL-00078b-Ig@fencepost.gnu.org> <83sf8eyk53.fsf@gnu.org>
 <E1qYFqa-0002BT-SD@fencepost.gnu.org>
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="1560"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
To: rms@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 22 13:40:56 2023
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
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 <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1qYPkm-0000BU-4q
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 13:40:56 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces@gnu.org>)
	id 1qYPk9-0002Bl-Vh; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 07:40:18 -0400
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1qYPk5-00025E-89
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 07:40:13 -0400
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1qYPk0-0004ae-UY
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Aug 2023 07:40:11 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
 s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date:
 mime-version; bh=L7bH/obM8T9BZd/uV59s4koGRGG0adSRubOwXclBQZg=; b=Tg607zJGSEiZ
 qudvAHHQSn/htCyaoiGH/VeIjyHNCOMXekGzb+y5sPg4hnsW4QrM4bfBP08V5WP91VpOvuxqu8ZHm
 aeAFLSl1pvwA4NutMP6SN6cVsHxz0fY9L8rHqPqyUOYicNtsMYaCRYrh03iB0JwpV9XrCaTk8M0Uk
 lb3oVOuxTUqT2FcS+bLxYIJ0sr3CqQMSjFBgRKWPMus6DiSYvqbNWarvO1mUoHvg/MP9ajsYtMlQt
 RU8M56eqx+rZ+9L10VKIB4GUcWjHw8T48Es1FsN5cL0B45hBG/iALO8avq1eEwHR8lVr2KZrzi8Pm
 JyikZ1a1te+O00fyE8DTbg==;
In-Reply-To: <E1qYFqa-0002BT-SD@fencepost.gnu.org> (message from Richard
 Stallman on Mon, 21 Aug 2023 21:06:16 -0400)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309106
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/309106>

> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Cc: casouri@gmail.com, stefankangas@gmail.com, njackson@posteo.net,
> 	emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 21:06:16 -0400
> 
>   > > I would be remiss to take whichwever advice is most convenient for us
>   > > just because it is convienient.
>   > > 
>   > > But I will ask a lawyer who advises the FSF about this question.
> 
>   > Any news about this?
> 
> No -- I was busy and let it drop.
> 
> But we don't need to recheck the advice we got before.
> We wrote down what it was and we can keep following it.

I don't think I understand: are you saying you have already asked the
lawyers about this and received their answers?  Or that the current
practice is fine and we could keep using it?

If the latter, then while the current situation is definitely not a
catastrophe, if we can avoid updating the copyright years every year,
it would reduce the maintenance burden, the code churn, and the need
to recompile everything once a year (per each branch), altogether
contributing to energy savings and keeping down the emissions, which
is good for the world at large.  So I think it's worth our while to
see if this nuisance can be avoided.

TIA