Re: Fwd: How do I go about debugging my Elisp code?

[Davin Pearson <davin.pearson@gmail.com>]

My code is obsolete if I can figure out how to
get the edebug online.  See another message
for my attempt to do this.  The subject of my other
message is: How do I get edebug online?

Thank you all for your help with this.

On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 at 00:33, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:

> * Tassilo Horn <tsdh@gnu.org> [2022-01-15 13:23]:
> > You said one-way compatible above, i.e., it is ok for me to use CC BY-SA
> > 4.0 code snippets from SO in my GPL3+ package but according to your
> > argument, when I post some elisp code on emacs.stackexchange.com, that
> > code is automatically GPL+ (because you say every elisp code is a
> > modification of emacs itself), yet they redistribute it as CC BY-SA 4.0
> > which would be an infringement.  Or is that not what one-way compatible
> > means?
>
> How I understand it CC BY-SA 4.0 is compatible to GNU GPL 3+, thus it
> is compatible to Emacs' own license.
>
> When you write Emacs Lisp code, you should license it so that license
> is compatible to Emacs' license.
>
> I don't think that every Emacs Lisp code is modification of Emacs
> itself. At the time when code becomes modification of Emacs in that
> case the license of such code shall be compatible to Emacs license.
>
> When is Emacs Lisp code not a modification of Emacs? In those cases
> where Emacs Lisp is executed as a program on command line or in batch,
> in those cases it may be not. When Guile is executing Emacs Lisp with
> --language=elisp flag, then such code is not modifying Emacs.
>
> When Emacs is run interactively and Emacs Lisp is loaded into running
> Emacs editor, such code is modifying Emacs and thus shall be licensed
> so that its license is compatible to Emacs license like GNU GPL 3+.
>
>
>
> Jean
>
> Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
> https://www.fsf.org/campaigns
>
> In support of Richard M. Stallman
> https://stallmansupport.org/
>