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: AW: Fwd: CEDET sync Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 03:37:51 +0900 Message-ID: <87fx4hw8sg.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <86bpf7q3fc.wl%lluis@ginnungagap.pc.ac.upc.edu> <87wrxvyijr.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <4B8C42E2.3080308@siege-engine.com> <7697A57B1AD9104F993CDF6A5B69430C09227D1F24@CORPMAIL08.corp.capgemini.com> <878wabxg0x.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87mxyrhxq8.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87635eycga.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87hboyhfnt.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87zl2qwsgk.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1267640836 30846 80.91.229.12 (3 Mar 2010 18:27:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 18:27:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 03 19:27:11 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NmtHn-0005Ym-Fz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 19:27:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60288 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NmtHm-0006iD-PD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:27:06 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NmtHg-0006ho-GN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:27:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42788 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NmtHf-0006hX-Jn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:27:00 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NmtHf-0005lq-BQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:26:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:58124) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NmtHc-0005l8-BU; Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:26:56 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps02.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF0A18213; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 03:26:52 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 963661A3801; Thu, 4 Mar 2010 03:37:51 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta29) "garbanzo" a03421eb562b XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/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:121612 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > That's only part of it. It has also been heavily motivated by the > desire to ostracize those with different beliefs, even if they are > compatible with freedom. Specifically, the BSDs have shown that it is > possible to maintain freedom of the whole for those who want it with > important parts of the system (eg, the OS kernel) licensed under less > restrictive conditions. > > Stop these false accusations! Read what others write! > We do not reject developers for disagreeing with us on > philosophical questions, as long as they are willing to participate > in the project under the rules and policies it has. But you do reject them if they are not so willing. What good is their moral position if they do not act on it, merely so they can have the benefit of using a piece of software? I believe the word you normally apply to such behavior is "backsliding", is it not? And you write your licenses to apply to developers working outside of the project, and to ensure that those who act on different beliefs cannot use your software. That may be necessary, but it surely is ostracism, exclusion from the community. > There is plenty of experience showing the danger that free programs > under lax licenses will have proprietary improvements. Sure. Nevertheless, the whole of the unextended program or system, that was written by the person(s) who gave it a free license, remains free (which is almost definitional), not obsolete, and available to those who want it (which is the practically important observation). As I stated and you quoted. You don't have to think that outcome is sufficient for the cause of freedom, but it is not false. > Whatever has happened with the BSD systems cannot disprove these > facts. There was no attempt to disprove the fact that permissive licenses are used as intended, which includes both free and proprietary extensions. I'm amazed that you think the implication that I would try to prove otherwise could pass for truth. > You are welcome to participate in this discussion to help improve > Emacs. You are not welcome to use the list to post accusations or > spread falsehoods about us. But you are welcome to spread falsehoods and misinterpretations of my posts, is that it? You don't like what I post, so you label it "accusation" and "falsehood", and attribute statements to me which I did not intend and are hardly supportable in the light of a careful reading. And at the same time you post that the Emacs 19 debacle was due to having your maintainer hired away. Of course that's a big problem, but surely anybody who's worked professionally will realize that that can be at most half the story. I don't think my posts suffer by comparison with yours, which is very unfortunate.