From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Vijay Lakshminarayanan Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Git mirrors Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:49:45 +0530 Message-ID: <87hb3e86vi.fsf@gmail.com> References: <8762k095n4.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871uuksdxi.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87lissh32y.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87zkh8e286.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87d3e4gttq.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ehyjrhxh.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87d3e2rfte.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <878voqfiaw.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lisq8bu3.fsf@gmail.com> <87pqi2dwds.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1318440033 10679 80.91.229.12 (12 Oct 2011 17:20:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:20:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 12 19:20:29 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2Tj-0004BM-4r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:20:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60186 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2Ti-0001w1-FN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:20:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:57487) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2TU-0001ub-78 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:20:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2TC-0004ho-HA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:20:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.216.169]:36960) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RE2TB-0004hd-UM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:19:54 -0400 Original-Received: by qyl38 with SMTP id 38so5132051qyl.0 for ; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:19:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oaUQo7AK5RylNkD2Y1BvkY4a+I0KGJon2tNuDZrN9Z8=; b=SaWbroHV5rZ+i7TNpa6cEsCyf3N5gHzODX175O+1Z6U+ZYwpbld/N86OlWzRzeO5xU jJs49l1YmqedjyfbjbZgx4Btan+g2rEpyrW9ZYB7MJFh6aPetmnPSUc6A2TTwkeSbHB5 IvQcpInFZffEMeGWj733VEKJcyifZS1+chf18= Original-Received: by 10.68.208.231 with SMTP id mh7mr2612354pbc.13.1318439993100; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:19:53 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from BALROG ([59.92.10.65]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ml4sm1835587pbc.0.2011.10.12.10.19.49 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:19:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87pqi2dwds.fsf@wanadoo.es> (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22=D3scar?= Fuentes"'s message of "Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:09:51 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (windows-nt) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.216.169 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:145036 Archived-At: =D3scar Fuentes writes: > Vijay Lakshminarayanan writes: > >> =D3scar Fuentes writes: >> >>> Juanma Barranquero writes: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>>> I just object to the way =D3scar (inter alia) is being shouted down. >>>> >>>> =D3scar is using the past to complain about the present. >>> >>> The past is "choosing bzr over other Free alternatives was politicaly >>> motivated regardless of technical merit; the interests of GNU prevailed, >>> users were dismissed." >> >> I don't get this. Eli raised the same earlier. Yes, it was a political >> decision. What's wrong with that? > > For the nth time: I want to know why such policy is considered good for > the Free Software cause (being GNU an instrument of such cause), because > I perceive that such policy creates animosity among the creators of Free > Software and goes against the principle of merit, which is second after > Freedom. I don't believe that git is technically superior to bzr. So your "principle of merit" does not hold here. > Anything else are strawman arguments introduced by others, who are > reacting on a Paulovian way at the presence of certain keywords :-) > > [snip] > >> Emacs and several other GNU projects are the /only/ projects I know >> which officially make their sources available in multiple SCMs. > > You don't know the projects that I know, then. Very likely. And if said projects do exist out there in the wild, asking them to support One More SCM will probably get you nowhere. > To be fair, it is so easy to create and host a git/mercurial/bzr mirror > of a Subversion/git/mercurial project that there is no need for official > support. AFAIK, it is not so easy to create and host a git mirror of a > bzr project, probably because the main hosting sites (github, gitorious, > etc) does not consider bzr relevant enough to care. And now you will > ask: "why don't you ask those hosting sites to add bzr support?" and my > response is: "this subthread is not about that (see above)." This seems like more reason to support bzr. As a GNU project, it takes higher priority than other Free Software projects out there. And now that I've said the above, your question, quite justifiably is: (repeated from above) > For the nth time: I want to know why such policy is considered good for > the Free Software cause (being GNU an instrument of such cause),=20 The reason to support GNU projects over others is that it is the stated goal of GNU that all distributed software should be Free and copylefted by law. To this end, any software project that shares the same goals will be supported. Git, Linux etc., fall under the principle of "Open Source" which is a pragmatic rather than political movement. This movement states that software must be Open Sourced because that's the best way to develop software in general and that free software is of higher (technical) quality than proprietary software. It follows from this that if it can be proven that software is better developed behind closed doors and released proprietarily said advocates must drop what they're doing and release their code proprietarily. (Before you say otherwise, Adobe Photoshop is /way/ better than GNU Gimp and Microsoft Word is /way/ better than Libre Office.) The GNU project makes no such claims. In their words, free software is its own good. Just like free speech implies people can freely make racist statements, free software implies that there can be free software out there that does bad things. Please note that these are /my/ opinions and not those of FSF. I don't represent the FSF in any capacity. --=20 Cheers ~vijay Gnus should be more complicated.