From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:24:53 -0400 Message-ID: References: <9mmFgzvrBwjt_n_VJyaJdXINraNi5HsGpwq-0MLeKiJA7kG2BQA4uywrzjyz7lpRS0OZDpjEi8lspOKYUA7P_QsODsDew_8nbH960G55fmY=@protonmail.com> <97DA7804-F647-4A1D-B8E0-AFFE7A324C64@gmail.com> <87d07xamrg.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <878silajdl.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="83765"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Yuan Fu , ndame , Emacs developers To: Eric Abrahamsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 24 05:25:46 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 1jRoyH-000LhE-TE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 05:25:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48248 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRoyG-0000tp-Tr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:25:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54124) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRoxc-0000EV-1n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:25:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRoxa-0003Qe-QF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:25:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:24679) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jRoxa-00037V-9t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:25:02 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E19748114C; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:25:00 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DCCAF8102E; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:24:54 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1587698694; bh=i3AkhPE+aEP7Oe37iUWZpUFHE6CF3R7QmrpRQxb8NCk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=DkrkYloqjZS0jyQy/JBFKUKQqH5rchFPSMgZzCCRtYsFwp370I3LcMwbmf3zL3nEw vd2eZ2xUrHi6NBuFNDMyo3KuZsqIrMZqYhq2CPoR11wh+QnpeA5hoNXtRodTj6D0FG JmMD7y3C6C9ZfKc2ozFKCT1GHc82jb7nojK0LJz5A9cKo3B6VId3sXsIl8ccezEACN Id4jfbM85QGu2vzXxlCyyzE8fVqye2i2Iappfl/yj2770X58obSyCEcdPxbA3atehT Tc3PXwuwSyvaNupWScuyRzpMkrlxoV0f9NtcfsHfn/wiUkMkXKjtKAwufqFGANbADw UmyAiIkcZqz8A== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 96B82120040; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 23:24:54 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <878silajdl.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> (Eric Abrahamsen's message of "Thu, 23 Apr 2020 16:10:30 -0700") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/23 23:25:01 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 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:247659 Archived-At: > It doesn't seem much more random to say "we're adding your repo URL to > our list of approved ELPA pull-sources" than to say "you're now free to > push whatever you like", does it? An ELPA administrator still has to > make that explicit decision to add the URL, so there's still a level of > approval? I think there's a fairly large difference: - When we pull from an external repository, every person who has write access to that repository is now in charge of thinking "does this fit the copyright requirements?", whereas only the original official maintainer has been explicitly informed about those requirements. - The set of such people can be changed completely outside of our control, whereas we always make sure that people have signed the proper copyright paperwork before they get push access. - After the initial setup, everything else would be transparent, so it'd be easy for the developers to forget or be unaware that it's published in GNU ELPA. The mindset on github is one that doesn't encourage careful consideration of licensing and authorship but instead encourages "happy sharing" [ Paradoxically, the FSF's insistence on tracking copyright assignments makes this very problematic (even tho, "happy sharing" is really what we all want to do) unless it's between people who we know have signed the copyright paperwork. ] So psychologically, I think there is a big difference between "everything takes place on github" and "an explicit step is needed every time you want to get the code to the gnu.org side". Stefan