From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Release plans Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:13:47 +0900 Message-ID: <87d4k6qm9g.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <10697146.3630221218551689983.JavaMail.www@wwinf4615> <20080812171404.GB7999@muc.de> <20080813092057.GA3010@muc.de> <20080814083817.GA2593@muc.de> <877iak7xfp.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <873al79akr.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan> <48A5BAD7.8030302@emf.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1219079654 1771 80.91.229.12 (18 Aug 2008 17:14:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:14:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lord@emf.net, hannes@saeurebad.de, joakim@verona.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org, ams@gnu.org, acm@muc.de To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 18 19:15:05 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 1KV8Jq-0007N1-C6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:15:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41032 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KV8Ir-00022j-RB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:14:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KV8In-000222-CT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:13:57 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KV8Il-00020R-Tw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:13:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54402 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KV8Il-00020A-Nw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:13:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:40336) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KV8IY-00037D-6q; Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:13:42 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 774DF1535A8; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:13:31 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 812B51A25C3; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:13:47 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM ?bug? under XEmacs 21.5.21 (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:102601 Archived-At: Richard M. Stallman writes: > The Linux kernel doesn't refuse to boot when it recognizes a non GPL > module being loaded. It justs informs you its "tainted". > > Emacs should of course just refuse to use functions in modules that are > not GPL compliant, not just inform the user that the moral integrity of > Emacs has been corrupted. > > I don't think this is a solution, because it would be easy to patch out > the code that enforces that restriction. I will remind you that that was good enough for XEmacs and Qt in your opinion. Circumstances may be different, but you should explain how. If it's distributed only as a patch, who cares? The patch that allows dynamic loading is already available and quite self-contained IIRC, we're in the same place already. If it's a separate distribution with the patch preapplied and maybe Emacs prebuilt, that is a fork. The whole world knows what you think of forks of Emacs, and how you treat the forkers. I think that's sufficient deterrent, and if it isn't enough, we can assume there's a lot of value in the dynamic loader that people want pretty badly -- specifically, enough to overcome the inconvenience of patching in the loader feature. I really don't get this. You are basically taking the open source route here. "People don't like to be free, so let's not tell them about freedom -- let's make it relatively inconvenient to use proprietary code." Why not wait for the non-free modules, and then publish a boycott list of such modules, give them a public dressing- down, and in that way draw attention to the issue of freedom?