From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: could matlab-mode be in ELPA or the GNU emacs tree (like auctex and org-mode)? Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:00:14 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878rxiu323.fsf@mat.ucm.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35064"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Uwe Brauer Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 21 01:01:18 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 1moaIH-0008x7-UD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Nov 2021 01:01:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51862 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1moaIG-0007Ll-0J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:01:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36620) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1moaHT-0006bN-7L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:00:28 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:34556) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1moaHQ-0004Fh-Pa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:00:26 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 96BF3100355; Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:00:22 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 74724100186; Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:00:16 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1637452816; bh=Yo8rwiNge2DkFYDtePznoWUR2y6K6Y9qN73oIeaXjIA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=C1OtqD6Lakyb5qM79qkuYai2UD0E+Ro97QPKCRBOizcbdh3zqad3SA0olxXLpSudu n6j2/e5Jfc9FV+5qRSEohXJx8/vIodFiqml1ymGUeTTOZb/ez2vd+reKGlADyfAbUa YD5PLwYOh9WUFP2E53N4EL8TGQyjCfrBAyNKtYqCjqz0lvb8ZU52bG9f7a9h0q7dYW 9vozetdJHLzJJ+4ZsMfgPW9DxzDW3nJI/Hyh8YeL1nOpEq+8iHnxd0jcwlpGufte/H shtlt6pOPuhUNAlbKlIpP/0U+9hgr2IQ89zrqSci3Q9bZm1LCLoZeB1UioCWD2U7Ug VgKSI0WQseGmg== Original-Received: from ceviche (unknown [216.154.30.173]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 38E621209C3; Sat, 20 Nov 2021 19:00:16 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <878rxiu323.fsf@mat.ucm.es> (Uwe Brauer's message of "Sat, 20 Nov 2021 18:53:08 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:279814 Archived-At: Uwe Brauer [2021-11-20 18:53:08] wrote: > That however changed a while ago: Mathwork not only renounced its > copyright, they explicitly asked us to remove any reference to it from > all the files, which we did. > > 1. Git blame (or hg annotate for that matter) told me that currently > the code belongs to only 4 authors, of whom 3 have signed the FSF > papers, and the other one is in the process of doing so. > > 2. There is another point that worries me: According to the > changelogs at some points the maintainers committed patches from > other authors, but in their own (the maintainers name). Regarding point 1: the output of `git blame` does not tell the whole story (if you reindent or move code, `git blame` will only list you as the author even tho the real author is the one who write that code before you moved/reindented it). It's not irrelevant, but it's not sufficient to decide if the copyright is clean. Point 2 is also another example where Git metadata (not just `git blame`) needs to be double checked, indeed. > However, before addressing this problem, I would like to know: > > Could matlab-mode become part of ELPA or even could dwell in the GNU > emacs tree? Very good question. I think it would be acceptable in GNU ELPA or Emacs (the legal&philosophical issues are the same for both) *if* `matlab-mode` can be used meaningfully without proprietary software (i.e. without Matlab). I think it's a big "if". Maybe a more interesting/promising path might be to split the part of `matlab-mode` that also makes sense with Octave and try to add/include/merge it into `octave-mode`, and then turn `matlab-mode` into an extension on top of `octave-mode` that's dedicated to supporting the bits of Matlab that aren't in Octave (that extension won't be included in GNU ELPA nor Emacs, obviously). > I know that matlab is a commercial product and its license is not > compatible with the GPL, but the same could be said about MS Windows OS > and MacOS and yet GNU Emacs support these OSs. > It would benefit the users of matlab who wish to use GNU Emacs for coding. Indeed, it's not completely black or white. You may want to ask RMS whether this gray is rather dark or light. Stefan