Yes please. That is one part of the text I said in one mail I have problems with. I think it leads into dogmatism of kind we are experiencing here. ________________________________ Från: Eli Zaretskii Skickat: den 9 januari 2021 09:39 Till: rms@gnu.org Kopia: emacs-tangents@gnu.org ; bugs@gnu.support ; ulm@gentoo.org ; ams@gnu.org ; arthur.miller@live.com ; dgutov@yandex.ru Ämne: Re: [ELPA] New package: repology.el > From: Richard Stallman > Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2021 01:35:54 -0500 > Cc: emacs-tangents@gnu.org, bugs@gnu.support, ulm@gentoo.org, ams@gnu.org, > arthur.miller@live.com, dgutov@yandex.ru > > > Just saying that a package exists and showing where its repository is > > etc. is nowhere near promotion, it's simply information. > > Please see the node References in the GNU Coding Standards for an > explanation of why informing people that an obscure package exists is > a form of promoting it. As I explained elsewhere, I think this part of GSoC is a mistake and should be fixed. It goes too far in its desire to avoid promoting non-free software, and that extremism in this case harms our own cause. The wording should be more balanced, or we should have some qualifications in the text to the effect that neutral information about software packages is not promotion.