From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:59:16 -0700 Message-ID: <87368ta0gb.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <9mmFgzvrBwjt_n_VJyaJdXINraNi5HsGpwq-0MLeKiJA7kG2BQA4uywrzjyz7lpRS0OZDpjEi8lspOKYUA7P_QsODsDew_8nbH960G55fmY=@protonmail.com> <97DA7804-F647-4A1D-B8E0-AFFE7A324C64@gmail.com> <87d07xamrg.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <878silajdl.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="50154"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Yuan Fu , Emacs developers , ndame To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 24 07:59:51 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 1jRrNP-000CyE-AC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 07:59:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51326 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRrNO-0001St-CG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 01:59:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46246) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRrMv-0000uL-IF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 01:59:21 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRrMt-0002MP-GE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 01:59:21 -0400 Original-Received: from ericabrahamsen.net ([52.70.2.18]:49840 helo=mail.ericabrahamsen.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRrMt-0002Hx-3j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 01:59:19 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (c-73-254-86-141.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [73.254.86.141]) (Authenticated sender: eric@ericabrahamsen.net) by mail.ericabrahamsen.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 71CF1FA098; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 05:59:17 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:24:53 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=52.70.2.18; envelope-from=eric@ericabrahamsen.net; helo=mail.ericabrahamsen.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/24 01:59:18 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 52.70.2.18 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:247667 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >> It doesn't seem much more random to say "we're adding your repo URL to >> our list of approved ELPA pull-sources" than to say "you're now free to >> push whatever you like", does it? An ELPA administrator still has to >> make that explicit decision to add the URL, so there's still a level of >> approval? > > I think there's a fairly large difference: > > - When we pull from an external repository, every person who has write > access to that repository is now in charge of thinking "does this fit > the copyright requirements?", whereas only the original official > maintainer has been explicitly informed about those requirements. > - The set of such people can be changed completely outside of our control, > whereas we always make sure that people have signed the proper > copyright paperwork before they get push access. > - After the initial setup, everything else would be transparent, so it'd > be easy for the developers to forget or be unaware that it's published > in GNU ELPA. > The mindset on github is one that doesn't encourage careful > consideration of licensing and authorship but instead encourages > "happy sharing" [ Paradoxically, the FSF's insistence on tracking > copyright assignments makes this very problematic (even tho, "happy > sharing" is really what we all want to do) unless it's between people > who we know have signed the copyright paperwork. ] > So psychologically, I think there is a big difference between > "everything takes place on github" and "an explicit step is needed > every time you want to get the code to the gnu.org side". Okay, that makes sense. Thanks, Eric