From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jambunathan K Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Copyright/Distribution questions (Emacs/Orgmode) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 03:05:25 +0530 Message-ID: <8738vagciq.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87ober717z.fsf@gmail.com> <87mwu9iwcp.fsf@gmail.com> <87mwu9fiu0.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87d2v4f5bb.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87r4jjp2d2.fsf@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364852141 14302 80.91.229.3 (1 Apr 2013 21:35:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 21:35:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen@xemacs.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, Dmitry Gutov To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 01 23:36:07 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UMmOb-0005vb-UN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 23:36:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39352 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMmOD-0000sc-5D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:35:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59379) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMmO9-0000sV-6C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:35:38 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMmO8-0000mC-6l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:35:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.220.42]:65112) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UMmO7-0000m6-W3; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 17:35:36 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id kq13so1509346pab.1 for ; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:35:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=HmVd1daf4tZZpvyKBe6JqAEkjLNlDC9SV9BfYgVua80=; b=RCT6n6JjKoML6HwsmBVWt2DnTiQX77GyWF9R+/9/KcE5IAXAq1RgmqadfdMdxWhLG6 G84xEiyGMorMBDYpS4w0+CwsyxvDr8idcO+TEipbsHIX32ZeYAte8m/Vzd9pC/FO8BwU fwW7Kntd1gsnkx2egHI+ah3i/NwxhCWWbwruztIbKIXO1RJZH84bLiCV2gx82Nj2zmoV MCYmXrPrEPwVc5gpKs1fcovAOrGGxneUrmYO4Tv2J9rhtGWq5T1HGQ7nKU7xbCktnCKI e8F6Bg0h09YKhTD7gDCSAuCnJ5R/FBT2u2PbAorZHzlPI6FMkeJCRJDwGOzSwmiP5xu6 BWLg== X-Received: by 10.68.29.98 with SMTP id j2mr20482944pbh.216.1364852134628; Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:35:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from debian-6.05 ([115.241.89.195]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qp13sm15160771pbb.3.2013.04.01.14.35.30 (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 01 Apr 2013 14:35:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:30:05 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.220.42 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:158526 Archived-At: Richard Richard Stallman writes: > At what point does a piece of code or a diff become a "change to Emac= s"? > > A diff for Emacs is always a change to Emacs. > I will think about the questions raised by a separate Lisp file. I was thinking (more) about your response. It opens two problems. 1. "Future Assignment" as an annexation policy rather than as a defence. 2. Artificial polarization (of people) by having "assigned" or "unassigned" contributors . IMO, there should only be "assigned work" and "unassigned work" (or "acquired" and "unacquired" work). It's the work that is polarized and not the people.=20 I am taking "Developer's initiative" to report "work convered by this contract" and it seems like my act is viewed as a taboo. See Item 2 of the assignment contract which says: | 2. Developer will report occasionally, on Developer=A1=AFs initiative= and | whenever requested by FSF, the changes and/ or enhancements which = are | covered by this contract, and (to the extent known to Developer) a= ny | outstanding rights, or claims of rights, of any person, that might= be | adverse to the rights of Developer or FSF or to the purpose of this | contract. I wish that FSF being a non-commercial entity be forthcoming with information on how I can withhold or terminate an assignment. For example, my Cable TV provider advertizes how I can subscribe via SMS to a paid movie channel. But he never discloses (readily) how I can un-subscribe from the subscribed channels. Just my 2 cents. Jambunathan K.