From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Grammar checking Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 01:13:19 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87sfdnyuxc.fsf@posteo.de> <83sfdl2z26.fsf@gnu.org> <58158ae49808189da7b2@heytings.org> <83mt3t2xz1.fsf@gnu.org> <86jzyxxqir.fsf@gmail.com> <58158ae4986fa602fe47@heytings.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37528"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lynn Winebarger Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 19 07:14:13 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pp08z-0009Zz-2I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 07:14:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pp08B-0007Yd-Av; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 01:13:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pp088-0007YT-F2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 01:13:20 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pp088-0007Ic-0o; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 01:13:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=Date:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: mime-version; bh=vDvrIRw6cj+aro4ajhwuZmDCdj0vM3ZFYsYkKk5DUoU=; b=Zq53OODlI2RW qsx6AIGeMDM2yvxvAs0alFKEt8miezWwuWbmmdcP8UxyjoHxmIx9u3Q1SBgAewqjd0NtgMtSgqX4h wfiFTk3ucsnzhmpMWf5y3RCCvOQcV4g7/nm1zMniHUrGCru70EUGkJ4NV0f9csd17YmFR1tHT7sb4 jEJgHHpFU068iZOam5N/8WpYH9fjPFt5hsBm2knGr9IAYxwBBmWa87R6rDHXpRxiR7/YAPmVI2XlX ggVtJZqDBnIl2Zg0aSp8WjUOjkcgKOQh8vQdzaa7PggFbTdfxZ6aqxypiC5Ou6aSDpBKTup47R+04 Npscz0FsrfFBxPDAG9avIw==; Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pp087-0004Uo-8q; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 01:13:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Lynn Winebarger on Sat, 8 Apr 2023 11:20:45 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:305426 Archived-At: [[[ 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. ]]] > I'm attempting to refer to the project and/or development process > maintaining the primary distribution of the software. I can see various meanings for that. Do you mean that you want to talk about those things now so you want to refer to them in your email? Or do you mean that you want a free program's release materials and documentation to refer to those things? > When a program > is distributed as free software, but the project that > develops/maintains/distributes that program exists in part or in whole > to promote either a proprietary or SaaSS version of the software, I do > not understand how the program and the project are effectively > distinguished for the purpose of Section 8 of the GNU coding > standards. I think you have a valid point. We could call it a "free program with a moral shadow." But we don't always have the luxury to reject them. It could mean we can't compile the program we care about, not at all. That would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. At most drastic, we could recommend that people avoid certain languages whose tools have problems of this sort. But just saying "compile Foo.blahlang" and including a make rule to do it does not promote the Blah compiler very much. So if the Blah compiler has a moral shadow, it doesn't fall on the Foo program very much. Not if you don't talk much about the Blah language in the Foo documentation (and why would/should you?). -- 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)