From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 17:14:51 +0300 Message-ID: <83o8qr7wh0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <9mmFgzvrBwjt_n_VJyaJdXINraNi5HsGpwq-0MLeKiJA7kG2BQA4uywrzjyz7lpRS0OZDpjEi8lspOKYUA7P_QsODsDew_8nbH960G55fmY=@protonmail.com> <87d07xamrg.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <878silajdl.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87tv18pyh4.fsf@russet.org.uk> <83blmu9u57.fsf@gnu.org> <7c61a272-f4ba-fdfd-755b-1a720e8cc2df@gmail.com> <838shy9srs.fsf@gnu.org> <7f820b59-ebbc-18c7-9f08-104a7ba88dd2@gmail.com> <834kslao2y.fsf@gnu.org> <052569f9-0571-6471-7a27-f3d7b36497a0@gmail.com> <83sgg58ari.fsf@gnu.org> <837dxh847w.fsf@gnu.org> <834ksl833q.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="48541"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: casouri@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, eric@ericabrahamsen.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, ndame@protonmail.com, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk To: =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit-Claudel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed May 13 16:16:04 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 1jYsB1-000CTe-Ql for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:16:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40584 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYsB0-0004aU-Nl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:16:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53370) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYsAK-00041s-4G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:15:20 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37526) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYsAI-00063f-Lv; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:15:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1583 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jYsA9-0002Ap-Dn; Wed, 13 May 2020 10:15:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit-Claudel on Tue, 12 May 2020 15:48:01 -0400) 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:250125 Archived-At: > Cc: rms@gnu.org, phillip.lord@russet.org.uk, eric@ericabrahamsen.net, > casouri@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, > ndame@protonmail.com > From: Clément Pit-Claudel > Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 15:48:01 -0400 > > Another strategy, which doesn't solve the problem for past commits but could help for future commits, is to embed that information into commits. Something like adding a line in the commit saying "I-have-assigned-copyright: Yes". > > Of course, just adding that line doesn't prove anything: we want to make sure that we do have an assignment for that commit. > So, instead of adding a line, the author could sign the commit with their PGP key, saying "all these changes are mine or from sources owned by FSF" (a bit like a developer certificate of origin). > > Now the problem is reduced to "does the author with this PGP key have an assignment on file"? But this question can be answered in a decentralized way (no need for an API): the FSF can just sign keys instead. This will only work for some cases: when the committer is also the author, and when the committer has a PGP key. So some cases will still need to be handled in some other way, and I suspect that those cases are the majority.