From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/44705 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Per Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Copyright/license issues (was: [COMMIT] sign & encrypt changes) Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 13:53:51 +0200 Organization: The Church of Emacs 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 1020686111 3357 127.0.0.1 (6 May 2002 11:55:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 11:55:11 +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 174h5C-0000s2-00 for ; Mon, 06 May 2002 13:55:10 +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 174h4g-00042c-00; Mon, 06 May 2002 06:54:38 -0500 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Mon, 06 May 2002 06:54:54 -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 GAA02251 for ; Mon, 6 May 2002 06:54:40 -0500 (CDT) Original-Received: (qmail 6987 invoked by alias); 6 May 2002 11:54:20 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 6982 invoked from network); 6 May 2002 11:54:20 -0000 Original-Received: from sheridan.dina.kvl.dk (130.225.40.227) by gnus.org with SMTP; 6 May 2002 11:54:20 -0000 Original-Received: from zuse.dina.kvl.dk (zuse.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.245]) by sheridan.dina.kvl.dk (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id NAA31821 for ; Mon, 6 May 2002 13:53:52 +0200 Original-Received: (from abraham@localhost) by zuse.dina.kvl.dk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id NAA24663; Mon, 6 May 2002 13:53:51 +0200 (MEST) X-Authentication-Warning: zuse.dina.kvl.dk: abraham set sender to abraham@dina.kvl.dk using -f Original-To: ding@gnus.org X-Face: +kRV2]2q}lixHkE{U)mY#+6]{AH=yN~S9@IFiOa@X6?GM|8MBp/ In-Reply-To: (Dmitry Bely's message of "Mon, 06 May 2002 12:20:02 +0400") Original-Lines: 37 User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) Emacs/21.1 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44705 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:44705 Dmitry Bely writes: > Anyway, this "monolitic tarball" approach looks archaic nowadays. It was archaic case 10 years ago, when Emacs was large compared to normal hard disks. Today, Emacs is a tiny application by modern standards, and unbundling make a lot less sense than it used to. > Most users needs *binary* [X]Emacs distribution and sophisticated > package system (like XEmacs has) that lets the end user to update > his/her system without downloading and recompiling everything. These days, I tend to update Emacs on my local machine automatically together with everything else by running dselect. I _do_ remember the time when I downloaded and compiled everything myself, but I disagree that doing that is what most users need these days. >> If Gnus development split, I'd contribute to the >> bundled version of Gnus. > > Nobody wants the development split, but FSF policy makes everything for > that. Ask yourself: why all these Gnus clones exists? Because most Japanese developers have problems with English? The documentation and mailing lists for the forks (not clones) seem to be predominatingly in Japanese. Apparently, they also have problems cooperating with each others, since there are so many of them. >> And I believe being paranoid over legal issues is a smart thing. > > Only when somebody proves in court that GNU license really works, they will > become "legal". When the GPL has proven itself in court, one of several reasons to insist on a single copyright owner will be removed. You need a single copyright owner (or at least strong disclaimers from the other owners) to change the license.