From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Drop the Copyright Assignment requirement for Emacs Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 19:33:39 +0300 Message-ID: <838shybfdo.fsf@gnu.org> References: <9mmFgzvrBwjt_n_VJyaJdXINraNi5HsGpwq-0MLeKiJA7kG2BQA4uywrzjyz7lpRS0OZDpjEi8lspOKYUA7P_QsODsDew_8nbH960G55fmY=@protonmail.com> <97DA7804-F647-4A1D-B8E0-AFFE7A324C64@gmail.com> <87d07xamrg.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <878silajdl.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87tv18pyh4.fsf@russet.org.uk> <83zhaih0oz.fsf@gnu.org> <83pnbegsvm.fsf@gnu.org> <547c9116-c1c3-8563-4aee-c62aa2302861@yandex.ru> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="86931"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 11 18:35:36 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jYBOx-000MTz-Je for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 May 2020 18:35:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53064 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYBOw-0005lX-KM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 May 2020 12:35:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53914) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYBNE-0003EL-9l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2020 12:33:52 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:40528) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jYBND-0007Ne-98; Mon, 11 May 2020 12:33:47 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1957 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jYBN9-0004K9-Dk; Mon, 11 May 2020 12:33:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <547c9116-c1c3-8563-4aee-c62aa2302861@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Sat, 9 May 2020 18:46:07 +0300) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:249818 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Sat, 9 May 2020 18:46:07 +0300 > > On 08.05.2020 21:54, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > After thinking about that for a while, I came to the sad conclusion > > that I no longer understand what is the relation between GNU ELPA and > > the Emacs project. > > I've always considered GNU ELPA to be the "blessed" package repository > of Emacs. One where we have read the code of all packages and can > confirm that they don't do anything malicious and don't use proprietary > software. And aren't useless, I guess. Why do we need to bless any package? I can understand why the package developers would want to be blessed, but why do _we_ want to do so? I could understand that effort being invested if we gain more packages that could be pout in core or bundled with Emacs or even just being optional dependencies in our code. But waiving our basic requirements makes sure these packages will _never_ be eligible, which makes this effort not worth it. > In any case, since we can't confirm the same of MELPA packages (at any > time the author of a given package could push out a new version with > some malicious payload inside; that's never happened, but still), we > can't recommend them to the same extent. We don't _have_ to recommend anything. People will use them or won't use them regardless.