From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.tangents Subject: Re: On Contributing To Emacs Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:18:50 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87k0fn8od1.fsf@gnus.org> <83y242ip0a.fsf@gnu.org> <87ilv6nzk5.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36192"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-tangents@gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, akira@akirakyle.com, larsi@gnus.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 31 06:19:33 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n3AKD-0009D8-85 for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2021 06:19:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47904 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n3AKB-0000NI-UP for get-emacs-tangents@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:19:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56906) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n3AJc-0000Mu-I9 for emacs-tangents@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:18:56 -0500 Original-Received: from [2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a] (port=37777 helo=mail-pj1-x102a.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n3AJb-0007cb-1G; Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:18:56 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pj1-x102a.google.com with SMTP id y16-20020a17090a6c9000b001b13ffaa625so29722692pjj.2; Thu, 30 Dec 2021 21:18:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=KzSpNsZI9AWSgmYtmNDxlCMfJ40dEOFSjoh2gQqT1Lg=; b=gTbVezgLWMWWH532zAVdFuk0k8gJDmRqsQc2cYvF5iBvLSDDBJsG+V6+NcmQDguQyA PhelzDHJsDFr7JSZyDJ1xWir6ppYlhu2qXChjHNwayIp8kGw2DwixavCpaED9/G1+EtM NnR+GfmhD+bmXIpxImV5NEXt8ZLna40B0ySyJI4BQJjdftu75xTvJRTaO+OWm6AlGEV6 olV8qMjdQWdOgfRS1vsopiG7mTgCQY+FUw75N11W5QghIHxRdjljwzGBgx0VSttBhuOh +9CPenkfttJpYGq3LUE3B1xxUIL66h/JfdZp2n3NAFRUIhoAWSGLxOYan41w6rwwUxl9 NOnQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=KzSpNsZI9AWSgmYtmNDxlCMfJ40dEOFSjoh2gQqT1Lg=; b=X6AzfjQOwyVBFsMC6zvybdaKKn9mjTzclS+YoZpE5RKgEPH7JFrdy4zp8TbjW1HtwJ p/zvWHKImBPSuu3c3gpDzCENLjvXYMLMWYKYk7x0QkLYeI0EBbzva+yj6mJBAU5vOnRg Vwz51V2f17flKMP53gIoCG7AAvfbAXmRKyCNp/SIlyn986MBWgS8tJcS4nZ9Jg72xvh7 oSntk7SSdL4n/3L5ETicWHt4tEMAJMmRPqx+4vBufKoGtAP5VEWwVd3D1G2FbfkDEWuo 2GBRm4jMYEEA2NY54euNyHygNd7+ei65IGQwC6mP9Io8d8M6zVJzCow7p8DPJ2rcHGH2 rNlg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5303KF05Q6VoM+INJ+C/06xGSHcZkwizxt6nH69eIlUCE3mazs8d 7UuOjO0i27xKbKZZs2Phvb4OuxqqRLINlAw9mAvr6/US X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJykeYqYcI4NUcBsd8w8mZzc+QatHLvYYECk1BSBqr9F9eTF9o+ocNXwXhdazyGZEwSLoRgCpHhhbYsCqGopSYc= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1646:: with SMTP id il6mr41565782pjb.143.1640927931185; Thu, 30 Dec 2021 21:18:51 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 31 Dec 2021 00:18:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-x102a.google.com X-Spam_score_int: 6 X-Spam_score: 0.6 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (0.6 / 5.0 requ) DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-tangents@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs news and miscellaneous discussions outside the scope of other Emacs mailing lists List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-tangents-bounces+get-emacs-tangents=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-tangents" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.tangents:764 Archived-At: [Moving this to emacs-tangents.] Richard Stallman writes: > The Glibc and GCC developers made a bad decision last June. The DCO > they are using is full of gaps, and they don't get it from all the > authors. A copyright assignment is much better. What is your view on the GNU software that does not have a copyright assignment, and not even a DCO? IMO, it would be more important for Glibc and GCC to maintain the copyright assignment than it is for Emacs. AFAIU, GPL violations with GCC are very common, and they are also common with Glibc. However, they are exceedingly rare with Emacs. I think this is no accident, but a result of the fact that it is more attractive to try to steal code from systems libraries and a compiler than from a text editor. The risk in our case is therefore lower than it is for these projects. > I ask lawyers how to keep the the copyleft strong, because that is > a priority for the free software movement. I don't ask them whether > that should be our priority, because that's the starting point. My starting point is the need to eradicate proprietary software. To achieve that goal, copyleft is one tool, and successful software is another. The reason that I think we should accept the risk here is that it is a) very small, and b) it will bring other huge advantages. The benefits would by far outweigh the drawbacks. In particular, it would allow us to include and re-use code from Lisp libraries that have been developed without copyright assignment. It would also significantly lower the barrier for entry, and together with other changes I think it has the potential to significantly help in recruiting new contributors. I do not find the blanket "our lawyers told us so" argument satisfactory. It would be better to discuss the pros and cons of the various approaches.