Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Jon Snader]

Oops. Sorry. I forgot to copy the list.

Jon Snader <jcs@irreal.org> writes:

>> I think that binary _is_ Apple's proprietary AppleScript
>> interpreter,
>> but using it in a subprocess to retrieve only contacts data 
>> (which
>> is
>> already possible on free systems) must be more acceptable than 
>> Emacs
>>including a C primitive to do the same thing.
>
> Why do you think ns-do-applescript and osascript are just about
> getting contact data? Applescript is a terrible language but it 
> can
> interact with macOS to do just about anything you can do from 
> the
> keyboard. As I said in my original post, I use it to get the URL 
> of
> Safari's current page without having to leave Emacs.
>
> The ns-do-applescript call is (or could be considered) simply a 
> call
> to an OS specific interface routine. It's useful for many things
> besides getting contacts and its presence in *in the macOS Emacs
> build* hurts no one, whereas its removal is sure to cause lots 
> of
> inconvenience for Mac users and those writing packages for the
> platform.

Re: Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Po Lu]

Jon Snader <jcs@irreal.org> writes:

>> Why do you think ns-do-applescript and osascript are just about
>> getting contact data? Applescript is a terrible language but it can
>> interact with macOS to do just about anything you can do from the
>> keyboard. As I said in my original post, I use it to get the URL of
>> Safari's current page without having to leave Emacs.

So how can I do that on a free system?  How do I obtain the URL of
Epiphany's current page without having to leave Emacs?

>> The ns-do-applescript call is (or could be considered) simply a call
>> to an OS specific interface routine. It's useful for many things
>> besides getting contacts and its presence in *in the macOS Emacs
>> build* hurts no one, whereas its removal is sure to cause lots of
>> inconvenience for Mac users and those writing packages for the
>> platform.

We don't want to make things convenient for Mac users, when those things
are not possible on a free system.  Just as Emacs doesn't provide
"OS-specific interface routines" to perform tasks on non-free operating
systems that are not possible on free ones.

Re: Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Filipp Gunbin]

On 30/05/2022 10:50 +0800, Po Lu wrote:

> Jon Snader <jcs@irreal.org> writes:
>
>>> Why do you think ns-do-applescript and osascript are just about
>>> getting contact data? Applescript is a terrible language but it can
>>> interact with macOS to do just about anything you can do from the
>>> keyboard. As I said in my original post, I use it to get the URL of
>>> Safari's current page without having to leave Emacs.
>
> So how can I do that on a free system?  How do I obtain the URL of
> Epiphany's current page without having to leave Emacs?
>
>>> The ns-do-applescript call is (or could be considered) simply a call
>>> to an OS specific interface routine. It's useful for many things
>>> besides getting contacts and its presence in *in the macOS Emacs
>>> build* hurts no one, whereas its removal is sure to cause lots of
>>> inconvenience for Mac users and those writing packages for the
>>> platform.
>
> We don't want to make things convenient for Mac users, when those things
> are not possible on a free system.  Just as Emacs doesn't provide
> "OS-specific interface routines" to perform tasks on non-free operating
> systems that are not possible on free ones.

Though I don't object to the function's removal, I have a feeling that
the comparison is unfair.  ns-do-applescript provides an _API_ to call
OS-specific functionality.  IMO, it's what the _clients_ of that API
(core Emacs features) do, that should be judged by the criteria you
mention.

Filipp

Re: Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Jon Snader]

Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:

> We don't want to make things convenient for Mac users, when 
> those things
> are not possible on a free system.  Just as Emacs doesn't 
> provide
> "OS-specific interface routines" to perform tasks on non-free 
> operating
> systems that are not possible on free ones.

Do you hear yourself? I don't want to be impolite and I do, 
believe me, appreciate the hard work that you and the other Emacs 
maintainers selflessly provide to the community but this is beyond 
silly.

In the first place, Emacs predates Linux by almost two decades and 
during that time it ran exclusively on what we now call non-free 
systems so there's no sacred free system purity baked into its 
DNA. Emacs being free software has traditionally meant that Emacs 
/itself/ is free and not that running it on a proprietary system 
made you a second class citizen.

No one is asking you or anyone else to do any extra work. All we 
ask is you leave what is already in place alone. If you aren't a 
Mac user, it doesn't hurt you in any way but if you insist on 
removing it you will (1) make extra work for the maintainers, (2) 
likely break existing software, and (3) annoy Mac users.

You can say we deserve it for being insufficiently pure but do you 
really want to alienate your second largest user base? That 
attitude will not, I promise you, result in anyone abandoning 
macOS for Linux but it could very well result in disgusted users 
abandoning Emacs for something like VS Code. I'd hate that and I'm 
sure you would too.

I'll accept whatever the community decides but I'm having a hard 
time understanding how this is even controversial.

Re: Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Po Lu]

Jon Snader <jcs@irreal.org> writes:

> Do you hear yourself? I don't want to be impolite and I do, believe
> me, appreciate the hard work that you and the other Emacs maintainers
> selflessly provide to the community but this is beyond silly.

That rule is specified in the information for maintainers of GNU
software, in the node "Platforms":

  The most important platforms for a GNU package to support are GNU and
  GNU/Linux. Developing the GNU operating system is the whole point of
  the GNU Project; a GNU package exists to make the whole GNU system
  more powerful. So please keep that goal in mind and let it shape your
  work. For instance, every new feature you add should work on GNU, and
  GNU/Linux if possible too. If a new feature only runs on GNU and
  GNU/Linux, it could still be acceptable. However, a feature that runs
  only on other systems and not on GNU or GNU/Linux makes no sense in a
  GNU package.

Anyway, the removal of ns-do-applescript will probably proceed, once I
figure out how to replace the code that uses it in-tree (mostly for
desktop notifications, which are also available on free systems, and
retrieving contacts data.)

> In the first place, Emacs predates Linux by almost two decades and
> during that time it ran exclusively on what we now call non-free
> systems so there's no sacred free system purity baked into its
> DNA. Emacs being free software has traditionally meant that Emacs
> /itself/ is free and not that running it on a proprietary system made
> you a second class citizen.

The GNU project was created with the goal of eliminating non-free
operating systems.  It was once acceptable for Emacs to only run on
proprietary operating systems while no alternatives existed, but not
anymore.

For a long time, Apple also claimed the power to stop people from
writing programs that looked and worked even vaguely like a Macintosh.
During that period, the GNU project had a policy against supporting any
software on the Macintosh.

They have stopped that practice now, but I doubt many people have
forgiven them.

> You can say we deserve it for being insufficiently pure but do you
> really want to alienate your second largest user base? That attitude
> will not, I promise you, result in anyone abandoning macOS for Linux
> but it could very well result in disgusted users abandoning Emacs for
> something like VS Code. I'd hate that and I'm sure you would too.
>
> I'll accept whatever the community decides but I'm having a hard time
> understanding how this is even controversial.

This list isn't a place to discuss that policy, which has been in place
for a long time (nor was it ever subject to approval from a
"community".)  Features only present on macOS are discovered and deleted
from Emacs on a regular basis.  Recent examples are support for color
Emoji and tabbed windows.

Re: Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Jon Snader]

Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:

> That rule is specified in the information for maintainers of GNU
> software, in the node "Platforms":
>
>   The most important platforms for a GNU package to support are 
>   GNU and
>   GNU/Linux. Developing the GNU operating system is the whole 
>   point of
>   the GNU Project; a GNU package exists to make the whole GNU 
>   system
>   more powerful. So please keep that goal in mind and let it 
>   shape your
>   work. For instance, every new feature you add should work on 
>   GNU, and
>   GNU/Linux if possible too. If a new feature only runs on GNU 
>   and
>   GNU/Linux, it could still be acceptable. However, a feature 
>   that runs
>   only on other systems and not on GNU or GNU/Linux makes no 
>   sense in a
>   GNU package.
>
> Anyway, the removal of ns-do-applescript will probably proceed, 
> once I
> figure out how to replace the code that uses it in-tree (mostly 
> for
> desktop notifications, which are also available on free systems, 
> and
> retrieving contacts data.)
>
...

> The GNU project was created with the goal of eliminating 
> non-free
> operating systems.  It was once acceptable for Emacs to only run 
> on
> proprietary operating systems while no alternatives existed, but 
> not
> anymore.
>
> For a long time, Apple also claimed the power to stop people 
> from
> writing programs that looked and worked even vaguely like a 
> Macintosh.
> During that period, the GNU project had a policy against 
> supporting any
> software on the Macintosh.
>
> They have stopped that practice now, but I doubt many people 
> have
> forgiven them.
>
...

> This list isn't a place to discuss that policy, which has been 
> in place
> for a long time (nor was it ever subject to approval from a
> "community".)  Features only present on macOS are discovered and 
> deleted
> from Emacs on a regular basis.  Recent examples are support for 
> color
> Emoji and tabbed windows.

This discussion has reached the stage where we have to agree to 
disagree. That disagreement notwithstanding, I restate my thanks 
to you for the good work you do for the Emacs community.

Re: Fwd: Re: ns-do-applescript

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > The GNU project was created with the goal of eliminating non-free
  > operating systems.  It was once acceptable for Emacs to only run on
  > proprietary operating systems while no alternatives existed, but not
  > anymore.

I think this disagreement is a matter of basic values.

Most software projects start from a desire for success -- many users
and widespread acclaim.  The GNU Project, by contrast, aims to
liberate users from the unjust power that developers impose through
nonfree software.

All else being equal, more success for our software tends to advance
the cause.  It liberates more users, and encourages further
development.  But that is not inevitable -- it depends on what we
would do to achieve the success.  Getting people to use our software
doesn't get all the way there.  Teaching them to value and demand freedom
is what we are really aiming for.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)