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.tangents Subject: Re: [ELPA] New package: repology.el Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 23:31:47 +0300 Message-ID: References: <83k0sp27f6.fsf@gnu.org> <83eeiwlsn6.fsf@gnu.org> <831rewldok.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18418"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) Cc: emacs-tangents@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org, ulm@gentoo.org, ams@gnu.org, arthur.miller@live.com, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 07 22:02:01 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@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 1kxcPv-0004e9-Qr for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 22:01:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36950 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxcPu-00077f-Tu for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 16:01:58 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51572) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxbyN-00077e-2m for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 15:33:31 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:49399) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxbyK-0007OE-S7; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 15:33:30 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.210.145.49]) (AUTH: PLAIN securesender, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 0000000000295453.000000005FF77014.00001857; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 13:33:23 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <831rewldok.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: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-tangents" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:499 Archived-At: * Eli Zaretskii [2021-01-07 23:01]: > > Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 22:38:15 +0300 > > From: Jean Louis > > Cc: arthur.miller@live.com, rms@gnu.org, ams@gnu.org, > > dgutov@yandex.ru, ulm@gentoo.org, emacs-tangents@gnu.org > > > > Software repository is promotion of software. > > repostory.org is not a repository of software. It is a list of > software. Maybe you meant repology.org is not a repository. Sure. But I meant that true repository such as Debian's or Trisquel's repository is promotion. On the other hand when one server provides directory of hyperlinks, it may not be repository but it is index or directory and search engine in same time that points to software. In particular I can find hyperlinks from repology.org Like here: https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/www-client/opera I can find hyperlinks to Opera website > > Repository package descriptions are promotion of software. > > > > The Wiktionary describes it as "dissemination of information in order > > to increase its popularity" in the context of what we speak of: > > Where do you see the "in order to increase its popularity" part? That > would mean to say something about the non-free packages that would > represent them as beneficial or better than others or worthy of > installing and using. I see none of that. I see that repology.org does not make any distinction and it cannot do that easily technically. So it does not make neither free software nor proprietary better or worse by any reasons. And that is the problem. > > In general I am surprised that some people like or wish to get access > > to descriptions of non-free software packages through GNU ELPA. > > GNU ELPA is not the issue here. The issue here is total rejection of > software that dares to provide information about software packages > which might not be Free Software. I explained why finding such > information is important to me in my role as a GNU maintainer. I am only talking about GNU ELPA and if repology.org should be in GNU ELPA as that way we would influence millions of people by giving them references to non-free software. It would speak badly of GNU project. But that you use the package yourself, that is freedom of choice. Jean