From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 02:18:01 +0900 Message-ID: <87fvn0senq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <871tyqes5q.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87a9ddg7o8.fsf@engster.org> <87d2i9ee8t.fsf@engster.org> <874n3ke1qn.fsf@engster.org> <87sir336qn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20140301215057.GA19461@thyrsus.com> <87fvn1y0vx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393780702 1276 80.91.229.3 (2 Mar 2014 17:18:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 17:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 02 18:18:30 2014 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 1WKA21-0006UY-Tu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 18:18:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36166 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKA21-0007p1-Dj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:18:29 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55439) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKA1r-0007o1-NW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:18:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKA1k-0002D7-8p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:18:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:52204) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKA1c-0002C8-3y; Sun, 02 Mar 2014 12:18:04 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E7C9707EA; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 02:18:01 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8E7641A28E5; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 02:18:01 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87fvn1y0vx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 2a0f42961ed4 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:170052 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > Shrug. The whole point of the GPL is "crippling by policy", > preventing reuse in proprietary software and thus also affecting > legitimate uses in Free Software. It's true it has that effect (although I think you're being overly melodramatic), but that is *not* the point of GPL. The point of the GPL is reciprocity. That has been shown to work in many businesses, including some that depend on proprietary licensing for the lion's share of their profit. And yes, it has affected legitimate uses, but those issues are becoming fewer as more and more projects switch to GPL-compatible policies (including dual licensing). The "use GNU" policy is merely self-defeating, I think -- stifling friendly competition is a very bad thing, have we learned nothing from the Great Planning Experiments of Marx-Lenin-Stalin-ism? How long does it take to see that GNU Arch is dead and WannaGNU Bazaar had its commercial support withdrawn ... er, just about the time it became really usable for Emacs development? But OK, the "avoid redevelopment of every feature" argument is very appealing, and the failure of communism is merely an analogy so why not try it? But this anti-LLVM policy? Let's see if I understand how this works. We have Groff, so TeX modes are treason.[1] We have GNU sed and gawk, so Perl, Python, and Ruby modes gotta go. Oh yeah, don't forget to rip out raw X11 and TTY support in Emacs entirely, just link to GTK. Where does it stop? Oh, yeah. It stops with LLVM. Good thing! But the logic escapes me. (And no, I see no logical reason to only ostracize a program if it implements the same language standard as another. If use cases are similar, that should be enough to argue against use of the permissively-licensed product in favor of the copyleft substitute.) Footnotes: [1] I wonder who might object a bit strongly to that decision, hm?