From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Nic Ferrier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: enable MELPA & Marmalade by defaul [was: mykie.el] Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 10:50:31 +0000 Message-ID: <87eh4izr0o.fsf@ferrier.me.uk> References: <87bnzshlo5.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87bnzshlo5.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <20140103.200846.1574807089640559527.cokesboy@gmail.com> <87a9f8g22x.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <76f5b9cd-3452-4189-b3a0-30dc55a3ee55@default> <87wqic65kj.fsf@wanadoo.es> <874n5gfvjv.fsf@mac.com> <93a2d060-c7f8-4ce3-9bff-f7397be690ff@default> <874n5fhn1j.fsf@schjetne.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389178252 30936 80.91.229.3 (8 Jan 2014 10:50:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 10:50:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: gs@schjetne.se, Drew Adams , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 08 11:50:59 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W0qiw-0006Oj-5k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:50:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46084 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0qiv-0001Ux-Q9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 05:50:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35410) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0qim-0001TJ-HU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 05:50:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0qig-0002hK-Lu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 05:50:48 -0500 Original-Received: from static.17.66.46.78.clients.your-server.de ([78.46.66.17]:49117 helo=po1.ferrier.me.uk) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0qig-0002h0-5V; Wed, 08 Jan 2014 05:50:42 -0500 Original-Received: from nicferrier-dell-xps (140.35.155.90.in-addr.arpa [90.155.35.140]) by po1.ferrier.me.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 70D19AC00AA; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 12:04:05 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from nicferrier-dell-xps (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nicferrier-dell-xps (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 503B5BC000A; Wed, 8 Jan 2014 10:50:31 +0000 (GMT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 07 Jan 2014 22:41:39 -0500") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 78.46.66.17 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:167722 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] > [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] > [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > A program with no license notice is not free software. > (See http://gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#NoLicense.) > It is very bad practice for a repository to permits nonfree programs. > Every repository should have a policy not to do that. > > > It seems like a reasonable assumption that the overwhelming mass is > > licensed under the GPL, but I absolutely do think a user cannot tell > > whether an unlabelled package is free or not, at least I can't, not > > without consulting the author. > > If a source file doesn't have a license notice then it is nonfree. > > Maybe this policy results from a misunderstanding on the part > of whoever runs Marmalade. We should try explaining the facts > about missing licenses and see if the maintainer of Marmalade > will change the policy to stop allowing them. Can someone put me > in touch with the right people? I run marmalade. It is not a misunderstanding on my part. You and I have spoken about it already on email. My position is that I *do* want to add licence functionality to marmalade. The functionality will: * allow package authors to choose what licence they distribute their code under (hopefully without any extra effort if the licence is stated in the code in the usual Emacs way) * allow users of marmalade to choose to use a repository which is exclusively: ** Free software only ** or GPL only ** or GPL + LGPL But I am not ready to introduce those features yet. I am still struggling with getting marmalade even functional (it is very bad code that I inherited). I am (slowly) getting there. I said earlier in this thread that I thought recommending a package archive other than ELPA was a very bad idea. The licence issue is just one reason. Another is control and understanding of who wrote what package. MELPA is anarchy in this regard (which some think is a good thing). Marmalade is not much better. Signed packages are being worked on. When I have introduced signed package functionality to marmalade and when I have introduced the licence features then I would be happy for marmalade to be included as a recommendation in an Emacs distribution. Till then, as the maintainer of Marmalade I would ask you not to do that. Nic Ferrier