On Mon, 14 Dec 2020 at 11:33, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
wrote:

> > and that list contains the following -
> >
> > (("ace-window" :external "https://github.com/abo-abo/ace-window")
> [...]
> >  ("ztree" :external "https://github.com/fourier/ztree")
> [...]
> > I don't have an issue with this, but it does seem inconsistent to argue
> > github does not comply with FSF philosophy and guidelines while at the
> same
> > time using it to maintain code which the FSF holds the copyright for and
> to
> > have references to github as the homepage for the package.
>
> Correction: the above URLs are reference to the Git repository, not to
> the homepage.  I know Github conflates the two, but the above URLs are
> not advertised to the end user.
>
> The URL we advertise as "the homepage" on elpa.gnu.org are taken from
> the "URL:" pseudo header in the package's main file (i.e. `<pkg>.el`).
> For most (all?) packages hosted on Github, that URL is the same as the
> one found in `externals-list` of course but I think the distinction is
> important (e.g. we could refrain from including the reference to the
> "homepage" on github while keeping the Git reference).
>
> I'm not sure I get the subtle difference you seem to be referring to. From
my simple end user perspective, I find a package in the list of packages by
running M-x list-packages , for example, I have the following in the
current list -

 ack                1.10          available  gnu        interface to
ack-like tools

When I move to that line and hit enter, the following window pops up,
providing details about this package

Package ack is available.

     Status: Available from gnu -- Install
    Archive: gnu
    Version: 1.10
    Summary: interface to ack-like tools
   Homepage: https://github.com/leoliu/ack-el
   Keywords: tools processes convenience
 Maintainer: João Távora <joaotavora@gmail.com>
     Author: Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com>

This tells me the homepage for this package is on github.com. The
repository hosting this package is GNU ELPA, which tells me it is code that
is copyright to the FSF. To my uneducated view, this leads me to the
assumption that the FSF uses github.com, despite their position regarding
ethical software and ethical hosting.


-- 
regards,

Tim

--
Tim Cross