From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/44723 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Amos Gouaux Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Copyright/license issues (was: [COMMIT] sign & encrypt changes) Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 14:50:10 -0500 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <87adrjse42.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> <87wuunyrl4.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87u1pqbsl3.fsf@alum.wpi.edu> <87bsby4oy8.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87lmb2336u.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87662631te.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87wuum1lwl.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <3cx9mgs1.fsf@mail.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1020714677 31738 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2002 19:51:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 19:51:17 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 174oVx-0008Fm-00 for ; Mon, 06 May 2002 21:51:17 +0200 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 174oVJ-0007Vo-00; Mon, 06 May 2002 14:50:37 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 06 May 2002 14:50:51 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (qmailr@sclp3.sclp.com [209.196.61.66]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA03912 for ; Mon, 6 May 2002 14:50:39 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (qmail 21333 invoked by alias); 6 May 2002 19:50:19 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 21328 invoked from network); 6 May 2002 19:50:18 -0000 Original-Received: from ns0.utdallas.edu (129.110.10.1) by gnus.org with SMTP; 6 May 2002 19:50:18 -0000 Original-Received: from localhost (crtntx1-ar4-4-60-082-004.crtntx1.dsl-verizon.net [4.60.82.4]) by ns0.utdallas.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B40E1A0F4A for ; Mon, 6 May 2002 14:50:14 -0500 (CDT) Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: (Russ Allbery's message of "Mon, 06 May 2002 11:55:04 -0700") Original-Lines: 44 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090007 (Oort Gnus v0.07) Emacs/21.2.50 (powerpc-apple-darwin5.4) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44723 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44723 >>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2002 11:55:04 -0700, >>>>> Russ Allbery (ra) writes: ra> And package management systems make life hard for people like me, who are ra> trying to maintain a central software installation in an unusual file ra> system like AFS. They mostly assume that you can just blithely install ra> stuff into the compiled-in paths, which of course isn't true in AFS which ra> requires one to install into a different location and then release. We don't use AFS, but structure things somewhat similarly with a twisted mixture of tools. For the most part it makes deploying software on a large scale more convenient, especially backing out a boo-boo. However, I concur that package systems can at times make this a horrible hell to cope with. (Seems ironic. Long ago I wished that all software would use autoconf so that I could easily set the "prefix" Makefile var during "make install". Gradually, this became more and more common as time went by. But HO! Now there are all these package environments that require even more fiddling. Funny how things improve to be more flexible. Alas, I digress way too much.) ra> I really like XEmacs (much better than Emacs) from an installation ra> perspective, but that's not because of the packaging system. That's ra> because the sumo tarballs have considerably more stuff bundled than the ra> Emacs, which reduces the amount of stuff I have to hunt down separately ra> and install myself. I often don't even bother because building is too ra> much of a pain, which means that XEmacs users have more Lisp packages ra> available than Emacs users. To be honest, this was one of the reasons why I've been primarily using XEmacs for the last couple of years after virtually growing up on Emacs. Very convenient indeed. And because of the package structure, it was pretty easy to script the removal of things that we didn't necessarily want to deploy. ra> It would be really cool if someone would put together a Sumo equivalent ra> for Emacs containing the stuff that has unclear licensing that the FSF ra> can't ship with Emacs itself. Not only that, but Emacs itself (yeah, topic for another list I'm sure).... -- Amos