From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Dimech Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: as for Calc and the math library Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 15:28:24 +0200 Message-ID: References: <864j7qhup6.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5hi0yts.fsf@valhala.localdomain> <86y152ge0b.fsf@gnu.org> <875xs60wmc.fsf@valhala.localdomain> <86wmklho4m.fsf@gnu.org> <864j7m8ewk.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="348"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 15 15:29:37 2024 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 1seaXo-000APV-Ur for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 15:29:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1seaWq-0008BC-Pp; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:28:36 -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 1seaWl-0008Aq-S2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:28:32 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1seaWj-0003rM-GI; Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:28:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.com; s=s31663417; t=1723728504; x=1724333304; i=dimech@gmx.com; bh=OPpYUewVccsnBaxD5gOVv74mOpBy9iOww68/pgY8f28=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:MIME-Version:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:Subject: Content-Type:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=QdjuwdpE+cgvTXAtigOn9dyZ2BPlkG8nwmWTclGIXVBeWfVKLm8fu/OHYUEbpbCU Y1WkpnI56D22ygXsHG+Q5ZCWfOtQRYUVuaTTw+Vw7QVxG1tmTYV9UFiZMxCMvUx+y JMJUWgDYSUtcKQW6IxdkigOE2/+bTyHtLdIVz90LzUYiHqGyl2Uj/QWTJgU8SN4CN yXm3YiKJYT2iFsd3NQmbKbKPKm+ZZU8N8eOGjA4C2Atl2I9dcHuDRKVBblPgzpm+i 0QGAFENymAVPdKAAmpXudo7XZUXza4zAUtaX0f0hcPYx4IAMjm7Wd8rHWBJezw69Y EyoIjvMSI5jqrIM5cw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Original-Received: from [92.251.79.197] ([92.251.79.197]) by web-mail.gmx.net (3c-app-mailcom-bs02.server.lan [172.19.170.129]) (via HTTP); Thu, 15 Aug 2024 15:28:24 +0200 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: <864j7m8ewk.fsf@gnu.org> X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:zcP+ZN3r0gqWve9XVd5g7qJbwjZfFHmZvMDsmzlj2hI7v/nWZ/N20rPK4uwL5AAbXNwF2 37YsC//rwmVRg/wPDGOk8Y4o8LQfEd1q5M9t0nyoQReEuYYpsw57HD8IiH8IXR6UUpBih5Hh6Ok9 kpmFa/NIXmfnp3LioO/qEO85JVXpCzfBz1nelEUGJ3Ra4Rvrc9bWCYopeg3ZgY/UKVpaf8VQjoa6 LPsYpY0xySVHnXVmsMpB2FJ6CjPVUhiQoILQ3ynfgjC79K9Q0MrD++BoScngbvcCSIq/DFh/g2Wl RY= UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:u1UlJFB2+kY=;dI5M8b9ybHGHiRBfai9x7apG+mN UVolvcpHO3KzOJXWt6aKHclOHSL/lxinREHceyP/55AmcCXJXYvP1hcZWfW2HrLSW1hr7rQOj uco4HfNhxRzLIqSub19ixwy4oEf5Sx4zYdfre/GX/cBEpKmWHj2FiCBN4zGZbdBajqpFvVVVD v28X47UUQYDgJBqnVEajjjJaHz4Rxz9cRmJOn96wwRggHtOwC5L/QBMW+UI3bWEZWCghQxxlm tDnoyDJ9ARjK27Qm6ltzUPIUDP5wAQI4kr6f7xRYMjr4fOSzW4lnOChR8m4bFWgd8Cai9hpdq iDmbOVJWd/d1ykaSTm2oh0p0UNx+MCpfwhlFPeYp2Z2tkgRGXui7ojQ6z6ntauh5mFGpTaRzq 3PPrxCnEApNkbkQYKe/1Vt7S+tkEsdpc5mQ20f0OOsFmJRuOxG4oen0P1pZeUI7AQrmunup3A qodK9FbNHkgvVYDdLOa/0YDsAr7Vl2eQ7AO4OO0p57za+ChBIuxX6zAuuB69vTW0QGJ8tVvAu WB+sO7OJWY5GwqdqKMaUwz/JwZc4tiKxEQ5i5IAHtSDSIiDiU39otRNsNo65wYE7Sc11XbhuZ p26mJhyLxZJoNL3kt/pxy51A0SgNqpWPyVQiOiMIsN7VWz7kVa3LrVOEKoZAVAsem0gYM70Zs PlMstpVc2TOtfHcwIXqSjzuszPxUrSRTimcsDKD79g== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.15; envelope-from=dimech@gmx.com; helo=mout.gmx.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:322782 Archived-At: > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 6:43 PM > From: "Eli Zaretskii" > To: "Christopher Dimech" > Cc: rms@gnu=2Eorg, emacs-devel@gnu=2Eorg > Subject: Re: as for Calc and the math library > > > From: Christopher Dimech > > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu=2Eorg > > Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 05:06:47 +0200 > >=20 > > > However, _distribution_ of such a nonfree combination would violate > > > GPLv3=2E > >=20 > > Despite this clarity, there's a recurring problem with the community: > > some maintainers go beyond the requirements of the GPL3 by creating > > additional barriers within the source code to prevent what they percei= ve > > as undesirable use cases=2E > >=20 > > This could involve adding checks to verify that only certain libraries > > are used or implementing "allowed-lists" to restrict what modification= s > > can be made or with what the software can interact=2E > >=20 > > It's quite right to argue that these additional obstacles are > > unnecessary and, in some cases, counterproductive=2E The GPL3 already = sets > > clear boundaries =E2=80=94 if a nonfree module or library is being use= d in a way > > that is kept private and not distributed, it is perfectly legal under > > the license=2E The problem arises when maintainers attempt to enforce > > additional restrictions that go beyond the license=E2=80=99s requireme= nts, > > sometimes under the misconception that doing so aligns with the GPL's > > spirit=2E >=20 > The maintainers only add these obstacles when there's a request for > Emacs as a project to distribute code which would allow making Emacs a > front-end for non-free software=2E As long as such code is used > privately by someone, or even left on some repository outside of > Emacs, it is not our business (although distributing non-compliant > software which claims to be compliant is against the law)=2E But please > understand that you cannot request _us_ to include such code in Emacs, > because then _we_ will be either violating the GPL or encouraging use > of non-free software=2E > And please don't forget or ignore that in addition to GPL violations, > there's one more aspect involved here, and that is not to encourage > use of non-free software=2E For the same reason we don't mention > non-free programs or libraries or fonts in our sources and > documentation, we do not intend to make it easy for people to use > non-free shared libraries by providing _our_ code that caters to such > use cases=2E =20 The focus in free software is on creating clear, understandable, and accessible code=2E The core principle of free software is that users have the freedom to study, modify, and distribute the software as they see fit=2E This freedom is best supported by writing clear and well-documented code that users can easily understand and adapt to their needs=2E Encouraging free software adoption through software design or structural means =E2=80=94 such as intentionally complicating the code to guide or li= mit how users interact with it =E2=80=94 is problematic=2E This approach runs coun= ter to the spirit of free software because it resembles the kind of code obfuscation often seen in proprietary software, where the intent is to prevent users from understanding or modifying the code=2E In free software, the goal should be to empower users, not restrict them=2E Any attempt to influence how users engage with the software through code structure, rather than through education or advocacy, undermines the principles of transparency and user freedom that are central to the free software movement=2E The power of free software lies in its openness, and that openness should be reflected in the clarity and accessibility of the code itself=2E > Emacs is Free Software, so anyone can take its sources and > modify them to do whatever they want, but don't expect _us_ to do that > as part of the official Emacs sources=2E This is not new, although some > people tend to raise the same issues here time and again for some > reason=2E >=20 > > For instance, claims that using a nonfree library with a GPL3-covered > > module is inherently illegal reflect a misunderstanding of the > > license=2E >=20 > It would be illegal for a library to claim GPL compliance when in fact > there's no compliance, yes=2E Other than that, no one said anything > about the legal aspects; the issues discussed in this thread are our > usual ethics that precludes us from encouraging use of non-free > software in conjunction with Emacs=2E Emacs, as a project, must always ensure that its releases are fully=20 compliant with the GPL, which governs its distribution and use=2E =20 There is ambiguity in determining software freedom=2E One cannot always determine a priori whether external software is free or non-free without examining its license=2E Imposing restrictions or enforcing certain ways of doing things to ensure compliance with the free software ethos is an overreaching approach=2E Forcing a particular method of interaction and then claiming that this makes the software free misses the point that freedom is inherent in the license itself, not in the prescribed usage=2E =20 > > As clarified, such usage is only problematic if the > > software is distributed=2E Unfortunately, these misunderstandings can = lead > > to a unpleasant environment where maintainers unnecessarily police the > > actions of users or other developers, potentially stifling innovation > > and cooperation=2E >=20 > It could, but it doesn't, not in this case=2E >=20 > > Moreover, some maintainers might believe they are in a better position > > to judge what is or isn't permissible under the GPL3=2E >=20 > This is a strawman: no one said anything about GPL; the fact that the > symbol required by loading dynamic modules has "GPL" in its name does > not contradict this, because the requirement is to be GPL-compatible, > not GPLv3=2E The statement you=E2=80=99re referring to touches on an important aspect o= f the free software ecosystem - namely, that the GPL (GNU General Public License) is just one of many licenses under which free software can be distributed=2E The idea that software needs to be GPL-compliant is indeed a common misconception, but it's more accurate to say that it needs to be compatible with the GPL, especially when interacting with GPL-licensed= =20 code=2E =20 But only when distributed=2E For software that is not distributed (e=2Eg= =2E, used privately or within an organization), these requirements do not apply=2E Suggesting or enforcing limitations on what users can code, even in private use is where the controversy lies=2E The GPL, as stated, does not place restrictions on private modifications or use=2E Users are free to experiment, modify, and even create non-free software for their private use, without any obligation to comply with the GPL=E2=80=99s distribution requirements=2E But you decided to hinder that possibility= =2E An additional item to the list of bad ideas=2E