From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:08:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83bnxuzyl4.fsf@gnu.org> <871tyqes5q.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87a9ddg7o8.fsf@engster.org> <87d2i9ee8t.fsf@engster.org> <874n3ke1qn.fsf@engster.org> <87sir336qn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <20140301215057.GA19461@thyrsus.com> <87fvn1y0vx.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87fvn0senq.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <8761nusb90.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1394479281 18283 80.91.229.3 (10 Mar 2014 19:21:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:21:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dak@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 10 20:21:31 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 1WN5lT-0005Ho-3q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:21:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50870 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WN5lS-0000ny-KF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:21:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60233) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WN5kO-000872-US for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:20:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WN5kI-0006uE-Ml for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:20:24 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38348) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WN5kI-0006sv-Jn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:20:18 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WN5YT-0003gl-Eh; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:08:05 -0400 In-reply-to: <8761nusb90.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> (stephen@xemacs.org) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:170258 Archived-At: [[[ 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. ]]] > With the GNU GPL (and copyleft in general), we make sure that all > copies of all versions of our code _respect users' freedom_. That's a nice euphemism for *dis*respect for the users. You treat them like children, fearing they will abuse their freedom by choosing bondage to proprietary software rather than choosing less capable free software, or even just saying no to the unique benefits of some proprietary software. Choosing proprietary software rather than less convenient free software is something that users of all ages regularly do. When I am concerned that users might fall prey to proprietary extended versions of GCC, I am treating them like real adults with real adults' weaknesses. I have taken measures to prevent proprietary extended versions of GCC from existing. If they don't exist, people don't fall prey to them. What's significant about this point is that it shows that your disagreement is not really with this specific decision about Emacs. Rather, you're against the broader goal which this specific decision is meant to achieve. What bothers you is not the possibility that this Emacs decision might fail, but that it might succeed. > By calling LLVM "friendly competition" you misrepresent the issue at > stake. You're wasting your time, asking me to change my mind based on > ignoring what's at stake. I apologize for using the word "friendly"; I should remember that your sense of humor doesn't extend that far. I am concerned with the serious distortion, not with the veil of humor that was meant to augment its misleading effect. You oppose some basic goals of the GNU Project; you are trying to interfere with our efforts to achieve them. One way you do this is by attacking decisions about how to implement them, claiming the decision will backfire. Every strategic decision has an upside and a downside. You exaggerate the downside and downplay the upside, and thus "prove" that it will backfire. But that is not a proof, it is just spin. Since nobody can see the future, such decisions are judgment calls. I don't trust your judgment about how to achieve our goals because you don't want to achieve them. I discuss my strategy decisions with people I trust, people who understand and agree with the broader basic decisions of the GNU Project. When they say I am making a mistake, I pay attention, because I know they aim for the same kind of success. When you make the same claim, I discount it because you don't want us to achieve that success. It may well be that you call a decision a mistake precisely because it would achieve our goals. I've announced my decision on the issue of Emacs and clang. I'm willing to explain the reasons for it in response to serious questions from people who support the goal. Your arguments, which oppose more basic points, belong on gnu-misc-discuss, not here. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call.