From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: as for Calc and the math library Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 19:24:51 +0300 Message-ID: <86bk1v8430.fsf@gnu.org> References: <864j7qhup6.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5hi0yts.fsf@valhala.localdomain> <86y152ge0b.fsf@gnu.org> <86jzgjfwqp.fsf@gnu.org> <87sev78arx.fsf@gmail.com> <86le0z89u1.fsf@gnu.org> <87o75v87n1.fsf@gmail.com> <86frr786k7.fsf@gnu.org> <87ed6r857g.fsf@gmail.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="7057"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, nicolas@n16f.net, arthur.miller@live.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Suhail Singh Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 14 18:25:11 2024 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 1seGo9-0001gr-Tt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 18:25:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1seGnx-0000D9-Oa; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:24:57 -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 ) id 1seGnw-0000Co-HN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:24:56 -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 ) id 1seGnv-0007lt-Sb; Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:24:55 -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=qKira3swBrTGnmf3eJm1uZODk0xThX9VEHx8BjYDnr8=; b=aJr51JcUWpnn rGfoxfoVIrCTHr5NJnGoR0tlf/qHLqQr9sFfzjshOc0QDO6qNutDGoN4/3oLihlRcMLsasO/YEPLC z8/wMi0F/sk6kUdIchrkMv2aih1/JAAza6XPiQ5mNEoSD6Wln3UfM0u42SQ0ccRcBuNEcWNgiT6Jf WaFNctGIvSLFbVZegiXD9ZZA4ha6/xvQNH6Mz1P+x3iCtUrmygEPIWYv2AYGMl+QqfEmwpPf++2zF LBhTSCRPKJ9krJbYg3kZXFK7xyCPTN7CfVhJ1HMndBTn76A9lejuvWg7/a2XTj+DOhJaN5TYYqyYT RzaB+lUB53LDE375yAeS8w==; In-Reply-To: <87ed6r857g.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Suhail Singh on Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:00:35 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:322754 Archived-At: > From: Suhail Singh > Cc: Suhail Singh , gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, > nicolas@n16f.net, arthur.miller@live.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 12:00:35 -0400 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > The way we do it when loading modules requires the _loaded_ library to > > declare itself compatible, by exporting a symbol of a certain name. > > That is an action by the library we load, not by the Lisp program > > which loads it. > > Thank you for elaborating. In the context of Emacs, having a claim of > GPL compatibility is not sufficient; it also matters who is making such > a claim and asserting compliance with the license terms. > > IIUC, the claim has to be made either by the library itself (the case of > modules), or by the Emacs maintainers (the case of an allow-list). > However, a claim made by the user (or a repackager) of a library is > insufficient. Is my understanding correct? Yes. > To test my understanding of the above, as a counterfactual, if there was > a standardized way by which libraries identified their license (perhaps > by exporting a pre-determined symbol containing something like an SPDX > license identifier), that too would have been acceptable as long as > emacs-ffi checked against an allow-list of compatible-with-GPL-licenses. > Is that correct? Yes, I think so.