From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Org schemas we talked to be non-free, was: [ELPA] New package: repology.el Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 20:56:21 +0300 Message-ID: References: <83zh0y2jtu.fsf@gnu.org> <83mtwx2gnx.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18752"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) Cc: rms@gnu.org, ulm@gentoo.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, ams@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 25 19:03:29 2021 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 1l46D2-0004iu-Sa for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 19:03:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39718 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l46D1-00025Z-S4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:03:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44372) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l469r-0000R4-0M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:00:11 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:51629) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l469o-0006Hx-0W; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:00:10 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:197.157.0.39]) (AUTH: PLAIN securesender, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 000000000001E07A.00000000600F0723.00005473; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 11:00:03 -0700 Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , ulm@gentoo.org, rms@gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru, ams@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83mtwx2gnx.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -3 X-Spam_score: -0.4 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263404 Archived-At: * Eli Zaretskii [2021-01-25 18:14]: > > Let us say enriched mode in Emacs, if it would not be modifiable by > > programmers who fork Emacs, I am not sure if Emacs would be free > > software. > > Enriched mode doesn't have or use a schema, so this example is > inapplicable. But it has its format. Right? Content-Type: text/enriched Text-Width: 70
Hello there
How about programmer comes and says, now I want to call it Enriched mode, but internally it has to look like this: FORMAT: Enriched Width: 70 Hello there > > How about Org mode itself? If its format would not be modifiable, then > > we would not have software similar on Org or based on Org mode, such > > as: > > > > OneModel — an Alternative to emacs org-mode > > https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=16/04/23/0149257 > > Is OneModel compatible with Org? If it is, then it's an extension, > not some modification. If it isn't compatible, then it's simply a > different schema, unrelated to Org. Exactly, I was thinking we were chatting about that. Of course that by changing schema one may get incompatible formats. And that shall be software freedom. We have to allow programmers to make any formats and build upon previous formats. Incompatibility or not, that is not major point. When StarOffice was made first time its format was incompatible to many other formats. It was proprietary software. I know it as I have purchased it in Germany and used. Without that incompatible format we would not have today Open Document Format. So those schemas should be also free that new formats can be devised. The history of StarOffice/OpenOffice/LibreOffice shows that freedom is important and that people build upon it.