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, 12 Mar 2013 23:18:02 +0530 Message-ID: <87li9sy0fh.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87ober717z.fsf@gmail.com> <87obepfomw.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1363110817 23331 80.91.229.3 (12 Mar 2013 17:53:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 17:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Stephen J. Turnbull" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 12 18:54:02 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 1UFTOk-00089E-5c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:54:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42258 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFTON-0007XI-Mq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:53:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58794) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFTNG-0007FR-VI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:53:36 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFTIx-0008DS-2f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:52:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-da0-x22d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22d]:36286) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFTIw-0008DF-K6; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:48:02 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-da0-f45.google.com with SMTP id v40so37032dad.4 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:47:59 -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; bh=MTaoF515MxLKCJezCb8Wox72acOxNmtRb73nCQTTlkg=; b=GMjRkjG0XFvN1GEJCccP5ZRp9zFSNqsO44ysUfvkQw/fiyGHX4GZFlrkeY5Jm/6ADQ g94R6TBag+Oopw/PqyBYX8aiigLEkCqdgurMqK87Xd6E7pdeiG1qs00BozBKmJdvrkMm yuRsPKCJSKWPuuEvJtKtWyN62ndteIfM2Gpc0CmeqGBKPG6N11cyM/0yFkClfzQpSeC1 BAez648Hc5pSXc49alpx9fk+DHx0ZymAUnutWPAlW0ffwE4SCVDiPHhcY5eEE5+pvZx+ +a/5OnFn5Ri19uhr3xXjOnmUQAtWdJsjicdmoW7D+s/YvwciJrxVQfWMXq9+Go5oMW6/ Kvzw== X-Received: by 10.68.218.72 with SMTP id pe8mr15046159pbc.112.1363110479805; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:47:59 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from debian-6.05 ([115.241.13.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id rr14sm25900374pbb.34.2013.03.12.10.47.54 (version=TLSv1.1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 10:47:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:00:07 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22d 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:157789 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > Files in Org mode are already on a track to be included in Emacs. > > By which you mean "it is the FSF legal staff's professional opinion > > You have misunderstood completely. I'm not talking about anyone's > opinion. I am telling you my policy decision. My case opens up some grey areas and I am entitled to know clearly the FSF's official position (rather than the intent) on questions I raise below. I also request that the answers be communicated privately to me and also other contributors when they come forward to support FSF projects. (Stay with me as I articulate my position) As some one has raised the question, I would really like that FSF office holders clearly explain to contributors in plain english what a future assignment would amount to. For example, the clerk clearly indicated to me in plain english that I should contact her office should my employer change. For example, the assignment document says and I quote ,---- (see Item 1a) | agrees to assign and hereby assign to FSF, Developer's copyright in | changes and/or enhancements to the suite of programs known as GNU EMACS `---- 1. When does an assignment come to effect. (See my other mail about an intent and an act that effects the intent.) My strong contention is that it comes into effect in the act of committing the files to GNU ELPA or Emacs repo. Distributed development is norm rather than exception these days and it is likely that the files are "prepared" and "committed to" in a local private repo maintained with any of the *-hubs and *-forges or in repositories like that of Org's which is outside the administrative control of FSF or the Emacs maintainers. Org is NOT Emacs. Org is A PART OF Emacs. The difference is very important and subtle. A random Joe can say his random file is part of Emacs. That doesn't make the file part of Emacs. The Emacs maintainers has to agree and accept that it is part of Emacs. A file becomes part of Emacs only when it is committed in to Emacs's official tree. My contributions to Orgmode aren't accepted in to Emacs. There is an in principle acceptance but a commit of questionable nature can be purged before the Org sources are merged. There is an intent to merge with Emacs but that intent is not effected until and unless the merge itself has happened. A file is an ongoing work. It is possible that a file is in a state of flux as it is edited and the copyright header might reflect wrong years. It is the release manager's duty to audit and tidy up the sources before a public release of the sources. So the act of public release is also significant when the source tarballs are declared fit to be downloaded and used. The act of public release is significant and should be contrasted with file-in-a-state-of-flux in a working development tree. 2. What programs fall under the suite? 3. How would a developer inform that he wants some work to remain GPLed but not without having a transfer of copyright to FSF. There should be exceptions right? 4. A developer isn't interested in contributing to certain projects - because of his own preferences. How would he exclude that his work on certain programs under suite wouldn't be considered for inclusion in Emacs. 5. How would developer terminate the future assingment. There should be a way to terminate right. > If someone asks us, as a favor, not to include in Emacs some of the > code he has assigned, we might in some situations grant his request -- > but not if we have already started including it. FSF reserves certain rights (of enforcement). It is upto FSF to decide whether it will actually exercise those rights. I feel there is a grey area here - My files are not part of any officially released source tarball, it is not accepted and hence not part of Emacs. Let me reiterate my position that the assignment hasn't actually taken effect and that by pre-emptively informing FSF beforehand, I have exercised my moral right to dictate how my own work - produced with my own personal resources - be used. (My work will be GPL and I have no plans to act in a way that is opposed to license that I have agreed to.) So my request to *NOT* include my work in to Emacs still stands. > As for what judges might decide about some other question, I am > confident that all a person's changes to Emacs are assigned, and I > will discuss the details with lawyers if I see a need. Please discuss with lawyers and let me know when a file *actually becomes* part of Emacs. Jambunathan K. --