From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Jostein=20Kj=C3=B8nigsen?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Licence of ts-comint Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 12:58:56 +0200 Message-ID: <1502621936.3273210.1071832168.58C017A8@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: Reply-To: jostein@kjonigsen.net NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_150262193632732101" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1502621957 26002 195.159.176.226 (13 Aug 2017 10:59:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 10:59:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Jean-Christophe Helary" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 13 12:59:12 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dgqbr-00065Y-9o for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 12:59:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36285 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgqbw-0006P4-2q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:59:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39000) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgqbn-0006Nu-M8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:59:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgqbj-0001FR-Ty for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:59:03 -0400 Original-Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:36763) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dgqbj-0001Dp-A7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:58:59 -0400 Original-Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85BBC2098C; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:58:56 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from web3 ([10.202.2.213]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:58:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= secure.kjonigsen.net; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=cgYeBud2eZmW0TZRHtIqn63NuvbvnCY80dR8Iw8V/ YM=; b=2WW0gVHAmMzDzXeWQdPLwgWCUTcfMwO037HfrT0fdYklxq9zkB85rVl7j nq+yjGaqZOXFTaPK3YE6KOYtfdHBqiAcnZKHfwee+J5ZPsgyKAzKWXRtTGZM1fCa yafBXZ2ArzsFxeMu0Kcbl8CfnOn3xx/ukY6MgTg3DedMsnZlXdg+Yjl/Hyh1eAUh /EHk1SewL5MeGo8YXCjZ4mi0lNb2aMYN7ZHDCpryPgVT8D4ICZIJDrAdJZLCYSMT 8LEXrUYLRnwBOQlAZDvB+dXUN4CC3XFeTcbiQd9yMqraM4kVOv+usrIZcsyqV2EI IP6lavzJg6jzaSzx9P50WAqI0dLcQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=cgYeBud2eZmW0TZRHtIqn63NuvbvnCY80dR8Iw8V/YM=; b=q1ms5VkluYsc oGdgpa9QQcCw85AW9nT3E9h1tfKFFPASevj+VvJDeMJlqbwySHxy9FgSXsdsCLc0 m+b7w5V7dukAZr63HK0nSCLVgHU6yK8OgTQvySkNnYRvSX6GdNYN6tsdGTDD2Lgv tLWu3UF8zGgCZEm2GtDwPniCPrtHMeqbKQiFgNwCxQhXKBZt1s0lvxUvhM2CM5Pr +M0vVp6/JnzkYZULaVQnhrRpLqX6+sq5mOs7ItHYCbn3mrCymc5VeMbSDh/bpq8W KvgXU4KD4ezdWyX5AzpZPZcHxNNqljSIunOY+51hz/mpJ7sFrpaCOyILqo5cARjW i/n6aBxFoQ== X-ME-Sender: Original-Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 5A7869E97C; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 06:58:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-33d44821 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 66.111.4.28 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:217507 Archived-At: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --_----------=_150262193632732101 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hey Jean. Thanks for the email. I'll be frank and admit I don't really care *that* much about licensing as long as software I use is open-source. That applies to stuff I write and maintain myself. (Prepare for a slight rant) With that said, I'm a bit put off by how much effort the FSF/GNU puts into copyright and licensing of code, as opposed ... the code itself. The whole GCC AST thing and debate about the "freeness" of the AST lead to LLVM being made. For similar reasons, Emacs and GUD has for a long time not supported a Elf-3 capable debugger, because before GDB got that capability that would mean supporting LLDB, which would be "bad" (it not being GPL-licensed and all). I've seen this quote on some forum online: "The FSF was formed to replace proprietary software with free software. Having succeeded, it now lives on to replace free software with free software". It's obviously meant as a joke, but I hope you can see where that joke is coming from. Is this really where your effort is best spent? And now this... I honestly find the *churn* the FSF is putting on its GPL licenses quite baffling. If the GPL v1 was good enough for free software... Why on earth should the FSF develop and deploy a new license which renders all former GPLed code "incompatible" (as you put it)? I'm lost for words. Are there really anyone besides Richard M. Stallmann who condones this move? If you now make the GPL-license incompatible not only with BSD or MIT-type licenses, but also the GPL license itself... Prepare to be even further berated next time the GPL vs BSD-license is up for debate in online forums. Why put so much effort into making license compliance so hard? >From the outside looking in, it looks like needlessly inconveniencing the very people who made stuff for your platform. You're obviously free to do whatever you please, but to me this just seems a misguided. If your goal is to promote free software, how do you see this helping? (End of rant) That said... My small and pretty insignificant package is already licensed "GPL 2 or whatever newer comes along". If you still think this is "incompatible" and needs an upgrade, and if you are willing to do the leg-work... You know where my repo is. Feel free to issue a pull-request and I'll have it merged. -- Yours truly Jostein Kj=C3=B8nigsen jostein@kjonigsen.net =F0=9F=8D=B5 jostein@gmail.com https://jostein.kjonigsen.net On Sat, Aug 12, 2017, at 10:24 AM, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote: > Hi, >=20 > In a thread in the emacs-devel maillist, the licensing situation for > emacs > packages provided through Emacs package archives has been under > focus. I> have > volunteered to contact the authors of packages that have a > license that> is > incompatible with Emacs, which is now under GPL-3+. >=20 > See > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2017-07/msg01069.html>=20 > So I wonder if you could consider to change the license of your > package> to > GPL-3+? >=20 > Also, you may have noticed that the package from which ts-comint is > forked has recently moved to GPL3+. > https://github.com/redguardtoo/js-comint/commit/eb4744122724b24e492c2171f= ff438e3ee2045a8>=20 > Yours, >=20 > Jean-Christophe Helary --_----------=_150262193632732101 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Hey Jean.

Thanks for the email.

I'll be frank and admit I don't really care that much about lic= ensing as long as software I use is open-source. That applies to stuff I wr= ite and maintain myself.

(Prepare for a slight rant)

With that said, I'm a bit put off by how much effort the FSF/GNU puts = into copyright and licensing of code, as opposed ... the code itself.

The whole GCC AST thing and debate about the "freeness" of the AST lea= d to LLVM being made. For similar reasons, Emacs and GUD has for a long tim= e not supported a Elf-3 capable debugger, because before GDB got that capab= ility that would mean supporting LLDB, which would be "bad" (it not being G= PL-licensed and all).

I've seen this quote on some forum online: "The FSF was formed to repl= ace proprietary software with free software. Having succeeded, it now lives= on to replace free software with free software".

It's obviously meant as a joke, but I hope you can see where that joke= is coming from. Is this really where your effort is best spent?

And now this... I honestly find the churn the FSF is putting on= its GPL licenses quite baffling.

If the GPL v1 was good enough for free software... Why on earth should= the FSF develop and deploy a new license which renders all former GPLed co= de "incompatible" (as you put it)? I'm lost for words. Are there really any= one besides Richard M. Stallmann who condones this move?

If you now make the GPL-license incompatible not only with BSD or MIT-= type licenses, but also the GPL license itself... Prepare to be even furthe= r berated next time the GPL vs BSD-license is up for debate in online forum= s. Why put so much effort into making license compliance so hard?

From the outside looking in, it looks like needlessly inconvenien= cing the very people who made stuff for your platform.

You're obviously free to do whatever you please, but to me this just s= eems a misguided. If your goal is to  promote free software, how do y= ou see this helping?

(End of rant)

That said... My small and pretty insignificant package is already lic= ensed "GPL 2 or whatever newer comes along".

If you still think this is "incompatible" and needs an upgrade, and if= you are willing to do the leg-work... You know where my repo is. Feel free= to issue a pull-request and I'll have it merged.

--
Yours truly
Jostein Kj=C3=B8nigsen

jostein@k= jonigsen.net =F0=9F=8D=B5 jostein@= gmail.com
https://= jostein.kjonigsen.net


On Sat, Aug 12, 2017, at 10:24 AM, Jean-Christophe Helary wrote:
Hi,

In a thread in the emacs-devel maillist, the licensing situation for
emacs
packages provided through Emacs package archives has been under focus.= I
have
volunteered to contact the authors of packages that have a license tha= t
is
incompatible with Emacs, which is now under GPL-3+.


So I wonder if you could consider to change the license of your packag= e
to
GPL-3+?

Also, you may have noticed that the package from which ts-comint is
forked has recently moved to GPL3+.

Yours,

Jean-Christophe Helary

--_----------=_150262193632732101--