Re: Use Emacs as the IDE for Wolfram Mathematica.

[Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support>]

* Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com> [2021-05-24 15:48]:
> You can add functionality as you wish.  When you use emacs for
> personal use, you are not bound to GPL Licensed code only.

(✿╹◡╹) That is right. Only that it is not a licensed software. I mean
it is possible to imagine it is licensed, but it cannot be conveyed or
given to anybody unless licensed properly.

> > If that package runs without modification of Emacs software, it does
> > not modify Emacs, it is just data that is interpreted. It also cannot
> > require any of GPL libraries that are GPL licensed. However, majority
> > of packages are written with the purpose to modify Emacs. Not to use
> > Emacs Lisp solely for its own purposes.
> 
> It could be for personal use, but not part of emacs.

You got it right.

> > If you write such code, under conditions not to modify Emacs, not to
> > use GPL-ed libraries, then it could be proprietary. Otherwise legally
> > it cannot be. Question is why would anybody use Emacs to write such
> > interpreted programs when there are many other programming languages
> > with MIT licensed libraries.
> 
> You are correct, I was talking from the legal point of view, and
> about emacs support for Wolfram Mathematica.  Ubuntu is one such
> system, where you have free software where proprietary code is added
> to it.

Ubuntu is operating system, is is collection of software. It is not
impossible to have collection with mix of proprietary and free
software, I have seen such collections since 1999. 

Emacs support for proprietary software would be possible if such
support is in terms of a mode that just takes care of editing.

Problem would be if Emacs package requires the proprietary software
and GPL-ed software in the same time.

The IDE and modes most probably do not require, they would just
execute external problem.

> > MIT licensed libraries one can use how one wants, GPL-ed no.
> 
> MIT has used many licenses, and it is ambiguous because many faili
> to distinguish between them.  One should not use the term "MIT
> License".

Yes, but you got it.


-- 
Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/