beamer, pdflatex and auctex

beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Xavier Maillard]

Dear help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,

I have two questions for you :)

1. do you know how to insinuate AucTex with beamer -ie. add beamer
into auctex ?
2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?

Regards

Xavier

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 10.10.2006 um 00:10 schrieb Xavier Maillard:

> 2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?

C-c C-t C-p. Or Command menu -> TeXing options. (setq TeX-view-format  
"pdf") ?

--
Greetings

   Pete

Some day we may discover how to make magnets that can point in any  
direction.

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Xavier Maillard]

  On Tuesday, 10 October 2006, Peter Dyballa wrote:
> 
> Am 10.10.2006 um 00:10 schrieb Xavier Maillard:
> 
> > 2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?
> 
> C-c C-t C-p. Or Command menu -> TeXing options. (setq TeX-view-format  
> "pdf") ?

Exactly. Thank you very much
-- 
Ciao Xavier

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org> writes:

> Dear help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>
> I have two questions for you :)
>
> 1. do you know how to insinuate AucTex with beamer -ie. add beamer
> into auctex ?

Use a current version of AUCTeX.

> 2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?

C-c C-t C-p toggles PDF mode.


-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Xavier Maillard]

  On Tuesday, 10 October 2006, David Kastrup wrote:
> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Dear help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
> >
> > I have two questions for you :)
> >
> > 1. do you know how to insinuate AucTex with beamer -ie. add beamer
> > into auctex ?
> 
> Use a current version of AUCTeX.

Current ? What version exactly ? I am limitted in what I can
install here.
 
> > 2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?
> 
> C-c C-t C-p toggles PDF mode.

Great ! Thank you.
-- 
Cheers Xavier

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org> writes:

>   On Tuesday, 10 October 2006, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> > Dear help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>> >
>> > I have two questions for you :)
>> >
>> > 1. do you know how to insinuate AucTex with beamer -ie. add beamer
>> > into auctex ?
>> 
>> Use a current version of AUCTeX.
>
> Current ? What version exactly ? I am limitted in what I can
> install here.

11.83 is the current one.  I seem to remember that first beamer
support was in 11.82 or so, but I might be mistaken.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Dear help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>>
>> I have two questions for you :)
>>
>> 1. do you know how to insinuate AucTex with beamer -ie. add beamer
>> into auctex ?
>
> Use a current version of AUCTeX.

The pdf stuff is also a minor gripe of mine and please tell us what is
the command for getting the AUCTeX version number?

>
>> 2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?
>
> C-c C-t C-p toggles PDF mode.

Strange, I'm shure I'm running AUCTeX, but it says:

C-c C-t is undefined

I assume my AUCTeX installation is not properly configured?

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Dear help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org,
>>>
>>> I have two questions for you :)
>>>
>>> 1. do you know how to insinuate AucTex with beamer -ie. add beamer
>>> into auctex ?
>>
>> Use a current version of AUCTeX.
>
> The pdf stuff is also a minor gripe of mine and please tell us what is
> the command for getting the AUCTeX version number?

C-h v AUC-TeX-version RET

>>> 2. How to add pdflatex command directly in auctex when C-c C-c ?
>>
>> C-c C-t C-p toggles PDF mode.
>
> Strange, I'm shure I'm running AUCTeX, but it says:
>
> C-c C-t is undefined
>
> I assume my AUCTeX installation is not properly configured?

More probably stone old.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>
>> The pdf stuff is also a minor gripe of mine and please tell us what is
>> the command for getting the AUCTeX version number?
>
> C-h v AUC-TeX-version RET

Thank you, AUC-TeX-version"11.14"

>> Strange, I'm shure I'm running AUCTeX, but it says:
>>
>> C-c C-t is undefined
>>
>> I assume my AUCTeX installation is not properly configured?
>
> More probably stone old.

You know it the best the Latest version is 11.83, 11.14 seems to be
from 2004.  You're right, I'll install a newer on.

An innocent question: Is AUCTeX too big to be included into the
standard Emacs installation?

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>>
>>> The pdf stuff is also a minor gripe of mine and please tell us what is
>>> the command for getting the AUCTeX version number?
>>
>> C-h v AUC-TeX-version RET
>
> Thank you, AUC-TeX-version"11.14"
>
>>> Strange, I'm shure I'm running AUCTeX, but it says:
>>>
>>> C-c C-t is undefined
>>>
>>> I assume my AUCTeX installation is not properly configured?
>>
>> More probably stone old.
>
> You know it the best the Latest version is 11.83, 11.14 seems to be
> from 2004.

11.14 was released in 2002.  Its _successor_ release 11.50 is from
2004.

> You're right, I'll install a newer on.
>
> An innocent question: Is AUCTeX too big to be included into the
> standard Emacs installation?

It would require about two dozen past contributors to be found and
persuaded to assign their copyright to the FSF.  All current
contributors and the past maintainers have already done this (we
reached that state about a month ago), but it will likely take quite a
bit of time and luck to finish this process.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

>>>
>>> More probably stone old.
>>
>> You know it the best the Latest version is 11.83, 11.14 seems to be
>> from 2004.
>
> 11.14 was released in 2002.  Its _successor_ release 11.50 is from
> 2004.

Thanks, I just had a lazy look at file creation/change dates at some
ftp directory.  But this was sufficient for convincing me that this
version is too old anyway.

>> An innocent question: Is AUCTeX too big to be included into the
>> standard Emacs installation?
>
> It would require about two dozen past contributors to be found and
> persuaded to assign their copyright to the FSF.  All current
> contributors and the past maintainers have already done this (we
> reached that state about a month ago), but it will likely take quite a
> bit of time and luck to finish this process.

Another really innocent question: I assume that all former
contributors have put their code already under the GPL.  Why is this
not sufficient for including their work in the official Emacs
installation, why must they even give up their copyright?  They
already stated that their code can be reused by everyone, couldn't it?

Understand me right, I'm not against assigning code to the FSF, quite
the opposite but what puzzles me is why the usage of GPL code could be
somehow degrading or harmful for the FSF and Emacs in particular.

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

[...]

>>> An innocent question: Is AUCTeX too big to be included into the
>>> standard Emacs installation?
>>
>> It would require about two dozen past contributors to be found and
>> persuaded to assign their copyright to the FSF.  All current
>> contributors and the past maintainers have already done this (we
>> reached that state about a month ago), but it will likely take
>> quite a bit of time and luck to finish this process.
>
> Another really innocent question: I assume that all former
> contributors have put their code already under the GPL.

There has been no explicit act or a guarantee or whatever.  They sent
some code to the maintainer, not stating the conditions under which it
may be used.

> Why is this not sufficient for including their work in the official
> Emacs installation, why must they even give up their copyright?
> They already stated that their code can be reused by everyone,
> couldn't it?

They made no legally binding statement whatsoever.

> Understand me right, I'm not against assigning code to the FSF,
> quite the opposite but what puzzles me is why the usage of GPL code
> could be somehow degrading or harmful for the FSF and Emacs in
> particular.

Because if some former employer of theirs declares to have the
copyright on passages, and this employer decides to release a version
of Emacs _not_ under the GPL, the FSF might be unable to sue for
compliance to the GPL because of "dirty hands": they have used code
copyrighted by the other party, and vice versa.  Such cases tend to
get thrown out of court altogether.

Emacs is too important for the FSF to risk that.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> Another really innocent question: I assume that all former
>> contributors have put their code already under the GPL.
>
> There has been no explicit act or a guarantee or whatever.  They sent
> some code to the maintainer, not stating the conditions under which it
> may be used.

Right, I forgot about this patch sending stuff, just thought about
lisp packages.

>> Why is this not sufficient for including their work in the official
>> Emacs installation, why must they even give up their copyright?
>> They already stated that their code can be reused by everyone,
>> couldn't it?
>
> They made no legally binding statement whatsoever.

>From a legal point of view clearly problematic, with common sense it's
another story.  When I give something to a "charity" I'm not eligible
to claim later on "interest".

>> Understand me right, I'm not against assigning code to the FSF,
>> quite the opposite but what puzzles me is why the usage of GPL code
>> could be somehow degrading or harmful for the FSF and Emacs in
>> particular.
>
> Because if some former employer of theirs declares to have the
> copyright on passages, and this employer decides to release a version
> of Emacs _not_ under the GPL, the FSF might be unable to sue for
> compliance to the GPL because of "dirty hands": they have used code
> copyrighted by the other party, and vice versa.  Such cases tend to
> get thrown out of court altogether.

I see.

> Emacs is too important for the FSF to risk that.

<off_topic>
I'm curious whether the usage of Emacs and TeX is still growing or has
reached some saturation / decline in this age of graphical IDEs.
</off_topic>

Furthermore I'm interested whether the guys in the snippet below have
signed legal papers for the FSF (as is claimed in a certain lisp
file), I'm using and reworking their code.  Do you know how I could
get this piece of information in an unbureaucratic way?

;; This file containes code from ansys-mod.el.
;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz> (Author does not respond)
;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz> (Address unreachable,
;;   Dieter Wilhelm 2006-03-08)
     
-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>>
>>> Why is this not sufficient for including their work in the
>>> official Emacs installation, why must they even give up their
>>> copyright?  They already stated that their code can be reused by
>>> everyone, couldn't it?
>>
>> They made no legally binding statement whatsoever.
>
> From a legal point of view clearly problematic, with common sense
> it's another story.  When I give something to a "charity" I'm not
> eligible to claim later on "interest".

But if there is no proof that you have given anything, that does not
help.

>> Emacs is too important for the FSF to risk that.
>
> <off_topic>
> I'm curious whether the usage of Emacs and TeX is still growing or has
> reached some saturation / decline in this age of graphical IDEs.
> </off_topic>

My guess is that percentages decrease and absolute numbers increase.

> Furthermore I'm interested whether the guys in the snippet below
> have signed legal papers for the FSF (as is claimed in a certain
> lisp file), I'm using and reworking their code.  Do you know how I
> could get this piece of information in an unbureaucratic way?
>
> ;; This file containes code from ansys-mod.el.
> ;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> ;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz> (Author does not respond)
> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz> (Address unreachable,
> ;;   Dieter Wilhelm 2006-03-08)

I don't see an assignment from either person in the copyright
assignment file accessible by GNU maintainers.

Where did you get the claim?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

>
>> Furthermore I'm interested whether the guys in the snippet below
>> have signed legal papers for the FSF (as is claimed in a certain
>> lisp file), I'm using and reworking their code.  Do you know how I
>> could get this piece of information in an unbureaucratic way?
>>
>> ;; This file containes code from ansys-mod.el.
>> ;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>> ;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz> (Author does not respond)
>> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz> (Address unreachable,
>> ;;   Dieter Wilhelm 2006-03-08)
>
> I don't see an assignment from either person in the copyright
> assignment file accessible by GNU maintainers.

Gosh, you never sleep, do you?

>
> Where did you get the claim?

There is an Emacs mode out there for the Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
program Ansys, the file is  called ansys-mode.el and there it's
written:

;;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz>
;; Maintainer: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>

So it looks to me that they at least intended to give the copyright to
the FSF. 

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> There is an Emacs mode out there for the Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
> program Ansys, the file is  called ansys-mode.el and there it's
> written:
>
> ;;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>
> ;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz>
> ;; Maintainer: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
>
> So it looks to me that they at least intended to give the copyright
> to the FSF.

Not necessarily.  They could have copied some original file from which
they started.  Whatever they intended, without them giving the FSF a
legally binding assignment and the FSF _accepting_ the copyright, this
comment is simply wrong.

But the question is whether it makes a difference to you.  It would if
you wanted to contribute the code you develop from there back to the
FSF, or if you trust the FSF to behave more reasonably about license
enforcement than the authors.

But other than that, you can hardly be expected to carry out diligent
research about what the above listed authors actually did in regard of
paperwork or not.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>
>> There is an Emacs mode out there for the Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
>> program Ansys, the file is  called ansys-mode.el and there it's
>> written:
>>
>> ;;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>
>> ;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
>> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz>
>> ;; Maintainer: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
>>
>> So it looks to me that they at least intended to give the copyright
>> to the FSF.
>
> Not necessarily.  They could have copied some original file from which
> they started.  Whatever they intended, without them giving the FSF a
> legally binding assignment and the FSF _accepting_ the copyright, this
> comment is simply wrong.

They mentioned octave-mode as their basis

;; Copyright (C) 1997, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006
;; Free Software Foundation, Inc.

;; Author: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>
;; Author: John Eaton <jwe@bevo.che.wisc.edu>
;; Maintainer: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>

> But the question is whether it makes a difference to you.  It would if
> you wanted to contribute the code you develop from there back to the

When the code will be accepted, I would be proud to contribute.  So,
yes, it makes a difference to me.

> FSF, or if you trust the FSF to behave more reasonably about license
> enforcement than the authors.

Or it makes a difference when I trust the FSF more about the
enforcement.  Sorry, I do not understand.

>
> But other than that, you can hardly be expected to carry out diligent
> research about what the above listed authors actually did in regard of
> paperwork or not.

Well I twice tried to contact them via email, but I'm not so sure what
you want to tell me with this sentence.  Shall I behave as if they did
not permit to use the code and rewrite every single line?

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>>
>>> There is an Emacs mode out there for the Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
>>> program Ansys, the file is  called ansys-mode.el and there it's
>>> written:
>>>
>>> ;;; Copyright (C) 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>>
>>> ;; Author: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
>>> ;; Author: Geoff Foster <fosterg@fp.co.nz>
>>> ;; Maintainer: Tim Read <Tim.Read@fp.co.nz>
>>>
>>> So it looks to me that they at least intended to give the copyright
>>> to the FSF.
>>
>> Not necessarily.  They could have copied some original file from which
>> they started.  Whatever they intended, without them giving the FSF a
>> legally binding assignment and the FSF _accepting_ the copyright, this
>> comment is simply wrong.
>
> They mentioned octave-mode as their basis
>
> ;; Copyright (C) 1997, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006
> ;; Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>
> ;; Author: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>
> ;; Author: John Eaton <jwe@bevo.che.wisc.edu>
> ;; Maintainer: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>

So they probably used an old version of octave-mode and did not add a
copyright notice of their own.  But their copyright does not disappear
just because they did not add a notice.

>> But the question is whether it makes a difference to you.  It would
>> if you wanted to contribute the code you develop from there back to
>> the
>
> When the code will be accepted, I would be proud to contribute.

To what?  octave-mode?  ansys-mode.el as maintained by Tim Read?
Depending on who maintains the stuff, and whether he requires an
assignment, procedures may differ.

> So, yes, it makes a difference to me.
>
>> FSF, or if you trust the FSF to behave more reasonably about
>> license enforcement than the authors.
>
> Or it makes a difference when I trust the FSF more about the
> enforcement.  Sorry, I do not understand.

One thing is having the copyright, another is enforcing it.  If you
want it enforced, you might want to see it in the hands of somebody
who cares.  If you don't particularly care about enforcement, this
might not be so important.

>> But other than that, you can hardly be expected to carry out
>> diligent research about what the above listed authors actually did
>> in regard of paperwork or not.
>
> Well I twice tried to contact them via email, but I'm not so sure
> what you want to tell me with this sentence.  Shall I behave as if
> they did not permit to use the code and rewrite every single line?

For what purpose?  What do you ultimately want to do with the code?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>>>
...
>>
>> They mentioned octave-mode as their basis
>>
>> ;; Copyright (C) 1997, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006
>> ;; Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>
>> ;; Author: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>
>> ;; Author: John Eaton <jwe@bevo.che.wisc.edu>
>> ;; Maintainer: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>
>
> So they probably used an old version of octave-mode and did not add a

Yes, this is also my idea.

> copyright notice of their own.  But their copyright does not disappear
> just because they did not add a notice.

I see.

>
....
>>> But the question is whether it makes a difference to you.  It would
>>> if you wanted to contribute the code you develop from there back to
>>> the
>>
>> When the code will be accepted, I would be proud to contribute.
>
> To what?  octave-mode?  ansys-mode.el as maintained by Tim Read?
> Depending on who maintains the stuff, and whether he requires an
> assignment, procedures may differ.

ansys-mod.el is (was) maintained by Tim Read but it seems only in 
      ^^^^^^
1997, I'd guess he isn't maintaining it any longer.

I corrected some code, rewrote the main part of it and extended also
the functionality of the mode.  So after I tried to contact Tim Read
in vain I gave it an new name ansys-mode.el.  (A version of it is in
                                     ^^^^^^^
the Emacs wiki as well.)

>>> FSF, or if you trust the FSF to behave more reasonably about
>>> license enforcement than the authors.
>>
>> Or it makes a difference when I trust the FSF more about the
>> enforcement.  Sorry, I do not understand.
>
> One thing is having the copyright, another is enforcing it.  If you
> want it enforced, you might want to see it in the hands of somebody
> who cares.  If you don't particularly care about enforcement, this
> might not be so important.

Now I get the idea, thanks.  I like the GPL very much and I like the
idea of enforcing its conditions.

>>
....
>> Well I twice tried to contact them via email, but I'm not so sure
>> what you want to tell me with this sentence.  Shall I behave as if
>> they did not permit to use the code and rewrite every single line?
>
> For what purpose?  What do you ultimately want to do with the code?

I'm using the code during working time, of course, and I'd like to
donate my work to the FSF, if possible and if the code is good enough.

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[David Kastrup]

Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> Dieter Wilhelm <dieter@duenenhof-wilhelm.de> writes:
>>>>
> ...
>>>
>>> They mentioned octave-mode as their basis
>>>
>>> ;; Copyright (C) 1997, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006
>>> ;; Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>>
>>> ;; Author: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>
>>> ;; Author: John Eaton <jwe@bevo.che.wisc.edu>
>>> ;; Maintainer: Kurt Hornik <Kurt.Hornik@wu-wien.ac.at>
>>
>> So they probably used an old version of octave-mode and did not add a
>
> Yes, this is also my idea.
>
>> copyright notice of their own.  But their copyright does not disappear
>> just because they did not add a notice.
>
> I see.
> ....
>>>> But the question is whether it makes a difference to you.  It would
>>>> if you wanted to contribute the code you develop from there back to
>>>> the
>>>
>>> When the code will be accepted, I would be proud to contribute.
>>
>> To what?  octave-mode?  ansys-mode.el as maintained by Tim Read?
>> Depending on who maintains the stuff, and whether he requires an
>> assignment, procedures may differ.
>
> ansys-mod.el is (was) maintained by Tim Read but it seems only in 
>       ^^^^^^
> 1997, I'd guess he isn't maintaining it any longer.
>
> I corrected some code, rewrote the main part of it and extended also
> the functionality of the mode.  So after I tried to contact Tim Read
> in vain I gave it an new name ansys-mode.el.  (A version of it is in
>                                      ^^^^^^^
> the Emacs wiki as well.)
>
>>>> FSF, or if you trust the FSF to behave more reasonably about
>>>> license enforcement than the authors.
>>>
>>> Or it makes a difference when I trust the FSF more about the
>>> enforcement.  Sorry, I do not understand.
>>
>> One thing is having the copyright, another is enforcing it.  If you
>> want it enforced, you might want to see it in the hands of somebody
>> who cares.  If you don't particularly care about enforcement, this
>> might not be so important.
>
> Now I get the idea, thanks.  I like the GPL very much and I like the
> idea of enforcing its conditions.
> ....
>>> Well I twice tried to contact them via email, but I'm not so sure
>>> what you want to tell me with this sentence.  Shall I behave as if
>>> they did not permit to use the code and rewrite every single line?
>>
>> For what purpose?  What do you ultimately want to do with the code?
>
> I'm using the code during working time, of course, and I'd like to
> donate my work to the FSF, if possible and if the code is good
> enough.

Code that is distributed as part as Emacs (and it sounds like this is
the ultimate goal) must be assigned to the FSF.  So since no such
assignment is on file from the authors of the modification, you need
to either find them and have them go through the procedure as well, or
rewrite the functionality starting from octave.el without making use
of copyrightable material from ansys-mod.el.

Yes, it is a nuisance.  I am in the same process for AUCTeX, and even
though we have all the maintainers and the current contributors with
assignments on file, it is still going to take years to get all the
rest in order.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: beamer, pdflatex and auctex

[Dieter Wilhelm]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
...
>>>
>>>
>>> For what purpose?  What do you ultimately want to do with the code?
>>
>> I'm using the code during working time, of course, and I'd like to
>> donate my work to the FSF, if possible and if the code is good
>> enough.
>
> Code that is distributed as part as Emacs (and it sounds like this is
> the ultimate goal) must be assigned to the FSF.  So since no such

I did not start out with this goal but I admit the idea of being a
tiny part of Emacs is now very pleasing to me.  It would be relieving
when I could give something, anything back.

My first priority is getting the code into a presentable form till the
end of 2006.  Then I hope with the release of Emacs 22 I'll getting
some feedback and do some further polishing.  At this time, hopefully
before 2008 ;-/, I'll pipe up again.

> assignment is on file from the authors of the modification, you need
> to either find them and have them go through the procedure as well, or
> rewrite the functionality starting from octave.el without making use
> of copyrightable material from ansys-mod.el.

I understand.
>
> Yes, it is a nuisance.  I am in the same process for AUCTeX, and even
> though we have all the maintainers and the current contributors with
> assignments on file, it is still going to take years to get all the
> rest in order.

Thank heaven I'm in a better position than you.  I'm quite optimistic
that in ansys-mod.el are mainly adjustments from octave-mod.el to the
Ansys idiosyncrasies.  Having gone so far, I think I'll do this step
of a rewrite when there will be a genuine interest under the Emacs
developers.

-- 
    Best wishes

    H. Dieter Wilhelm
    Darmstadt, Germany