From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: non-gnu elpa issue tracking Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:48:43 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20201209125516.lenqswi7fhiscbr2@E15-2016.optimum.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30629"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Boruch Baum , Stefan Kangas , Jean Louis , Emacs-Devel List To: Thibaut Verron Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 10 16:50:10 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1knOCn-0007qS-4N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 16:50:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55566 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1knOCm-00035v-5j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:50:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56540) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1knOBW-0002bw-Bu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:48:50 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:35242) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1knOBT-0001XR-KG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:48:49 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 38BDC811EE; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:48:46 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A8B0180D86; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:48:44 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1607615324; bh=aQAT+mRG1x2RD5bjwNcxlwfSLslPRwBBhyhinTTes28=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=NnB6bPRuXD/wnDFkeUYgDFyUwOTrgKQwSoB9nYE98g9D39m6AV/VJ3RrdX24Bdjn0 v2dq4YYvmdRrgrbMb1oBggVxhDKlvWTOBwEM6VIxUbIXcbu1u5Zw++4xa3ifunAEr7 3ck16K54XC7QT+s3tmqWOrxN5W+mxco6FCg1Zag9kGRGSG1M9D+cunMfiyrfA++Wkn I6x60xuxvbLZJoSe982dQCGYUrA6RAnT1VU7YjixR3HlL/ItNhhZe8A+o469LUc9QX hYA+HE8zF4INx/3Eci9vxWhIl7OG9YKqCaymumlypByQyzaHlJViD58Bz+52tONAk+ Rwqd06WozIhmQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F50912039E; Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:48:44 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Thibaut Verron's message of "Thu, 10 Dec 2020 10:14:50 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:260657 Archived-At: > Am I correct to understand that if some developers decide that they do > not want their package included in non-GNU ELPA, the only way that > they can enforce this decision is to use a less permissive license for > future releases? Yes and no: the legality of distributing an ELisp package with a license that is not compatible with GPLv3+ is dubious (because that code likely can't run without linking to Emacs which is GPLv3+). So it's not clear whether they could legally use a less permissive license. Stefan