From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bruce Stephens Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Release plans Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:39:49 +0100 Message-ID: <803akoyrqy.fsf@tiny.isode.net> References: <87hc9ka8eg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20080817073124.GA1294@muc.de> <87ljyv5gy5.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20080818101802.GA2615@muc.de> <87bpzqqk7b.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <20080818210927.GD2615@muc.de> <87wsidnxqp.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87ljytkwpk.fsf@rattlesnake.com> <878wusz0v9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87vdxp27z6.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87prnxe5hc.fsf@rattlesnake.com> <873aktck5d.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87k5e5dsvq.fsf@rattlesnake.com> <48B44802.1080302@emf.net> <87ej4atczj.fsf@gmail.com> <48B78A75.8080103@emf.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1220010012 1447 80.91.229.12 (29 Aug 2008 11:40:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:40:12 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 29 13:41:06 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KZ2Lh-0004Oq-Qq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:41:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48963 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KZ2Kj-0007Jg-6i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:40:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KZ2KZ-0007G2-Ia for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:39:55 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KZ2KX-0007E9-RY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:39:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34568 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KZ2KX-0007Dw-Ku for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:39:53 -0400 Original-Received: from rufus.isode.com ([62.3.217.251]:48486) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KZ2KX-0000jW-0d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:39:53 -0400 Original-Received: from tiny.isode.net (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (smtp internal) via TCP with SMTP id for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:39:49 +0100 Original-Received: by tiny.isode.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:39:49 +0100 X-Hashcash: 1:20:080829:emacs-devel@gnu.org::dWlgzF+uk+mnAv4/:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000006bHY In-Reply-To: <48B78A75.8080103@emf.net> (Thomas Lord's message of "Thu\, 28 Aug 2008 22\:34\:45 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:103166 Thomas Lord writes: > Richard M. Stallman wrote: >> 2- Banning technical facilities like DLL from free software is likely >> to leave a clear advantage to proprietary software that use those >> facilities to provide the best technical solution. >> >> Refusing to support DLL does not give an advantage to non-free >> software. In particular, it does not give XRefractory an advantage >> over CEDET. > > It gives an equal technical disadvantage to both but an > economic favor to XRefractory. That economic favor to > XRefractory is an example of why people invest in proprietary > software entrepreneurship. > > The declaration of intent to refuse (aka "ban") helps give > XRefractory a business plan (because the same ban makes life harder > for less speculatively funded competitors like CEDET). Is this an abstract discussion or is it concretely about Emacs and CEDET? (I'm struggling to imagine what realistic benefit CEDET might get from a dynamic extension to Emacs. Maybe linking with SQLite?) Surely XRefactory's big advantage over CEDET is use of an EDG-based parser (which costs money)? So in that sense the restrictions on how the core gcc project develops (whether it can provide suitable dumps of parse trees and the like) are more significant than restrictions on Emacs?