From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jonas Bernoulli Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some hard numbers on licenses used by elisp packages Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 15:48:11 +0200 Message-ID: <8760ebwe04.fsf@bernoul.li> References: <87shi4z7ps.fsf@bernoul.li> <87zic9zuof.fsf@bernoul.li> <877ezaajme.fsf@bernoul.li> <87shhw2xuv.fsf@bernoul.li> <87a844cmgx.fsf@ernst> <874ltwbzpl.fsf@bernoul.li> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1501336142 16627 195.159.176.226 (29 Jul 2017 13:49:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 13:49:02 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: mu4e 0.9.19; emacs 25.2.1 Cc: mats.lidell@cag.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 29 15:48:55 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 1dbS6x-0003oL-21 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 15:48:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52452 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dbS71-00081T-6m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 09:48:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40212) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dbS6M-00081F-NI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 09:48:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dbS6J-0004h5-MK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 09:48:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([212.243.197.30]:38644) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dbS6J-0004eo-Dy; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 09:48:15 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82075167A2; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 15:48:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by Hostpark/NetZone Mailprotection at hostpark.net Original-Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail1.hostpark.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10124) with ESMTP id USrSn4Zy6bCy; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 15:48:12 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from desktop (77-58-214-193.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.58.214.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA59416559; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 15:48:11 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 212.243.197.30 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:217130 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > Also I am under the impression that things are getting better, not > > worse. A higher percentage of new packages specify a license than in > > the old days. > > This might be very significant. Would you like to describe the > comparison more precisely? > > For instance, what is the pool of packages you're analyzing? All > packages in GitHub? All Emacs packages? Something else? All Emacs packages known to me. > What time periods did you use for analysis, for each time period, what > was the fraction with licenses? I didn't say "analyse" but "impression" ;-) While I do intend to thoroughly analyse the data in the future, I don't currently have the time to do that. I am quite busy improving the *current* licensing situation by contacting authors. Once that is fully on track, I can concentrate on other important things again, like talking to you about including Magit it in Elpa for example. And then I also have some priorities of my own. > Thank you very much. It's possible that your efforts are responsible > for the improvement, if it is in Emacs packages. You are welcome!