From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Berman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: enable MELPA & Marmalade by defaul [was: mykie.el] Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 16:12:26 +0100 Message-ID: <87wqibu8px.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> 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 1389107570 30382 80.91.229.3 (7 Jan 2014 15:12:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 15:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Grim Schjetne Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 07 16:12:56 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 1W0YKr-0004Ra-Uq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 16:12:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41173 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0YKr-0002td-Co for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:12:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39942) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0YKX-0002XM-04 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:12:37 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0YKS-0000gA-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:12:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:63364) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W0YKR-0000g4-NC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:12:27 -0500 Original-Received: from rosalinde.fritz.box ([89.245.110.215]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LyWAQ-1VMdSe2EeU-015t9g for ; Tue, 07 Jan 2014 16:12:26 +0100 In-Reply-To: <874n5fhn1j.fsf@schjetne.se> (Grim Schjetne's message of "Tue, 07 Jan 2014 15:41:28 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:zRhOHTz2w5t0k7Q5tJkAMKarNluPaWJmwvuGQ6A1p1ECDHvOhZW aMcUHlwNpaDcs92AONO/Ho33IoteGSL0JJ8ED+j7nhWfFgcdwrG3dSaIgSvDd1wKIhaVvSM +uaguphOaN4Oq04VqOrhpv5VSR3MmlCVi+okv66PI3odxXJxl/Cu8w6FB7xB5Vg5tDfNtxA sFwDG6ZkaVwX1pYaHmd9w== X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.18 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:167613 Archived-At: On Tue, 07 Jan 2014 15:41:28 +0100 Grim Schjetne wrote: > Drew Adams writes: > >> And anyway, nothing says that those repositories involve much >> non-free software, or even any at all. > > I viewed a random package in Marmalade and it had no indication of a > license whatsoever. Perhaps the author intended to release it as free > software or could easily be convinced to do so, but as it stands now, > Marmalade is not completely free software. > >> Without looking, I'd bet that the *overwhelming mass* of packages >> in those two repositories are free software (GPL'd). Why make >> users jump through extra hoops to access all that free software, >> even if there might also be a non-free package there somewhere? >> >> Do you think that a downloading user cannot tell whether some >> software is free or not? If so, is this about trying to hide >> that non-free software from their unsuspecting hands, so they >> cannot make the awful mistake of not recognizing it? > > 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. Is it even "legal" to distribute any elisp code that is not at least compatible with the GPL? After all, any elisp code will have to link with Emacs to be usable. Steve Berman