GNU bug report logs - #14732
Package dos-mode for ELPA

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> IRO.UMontreal.CA>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: lekktu <at> gmail.com, 14732 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, arnima <at> hafro.is
Subject: bug#14732: Package dos-mode for ELPA
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 13:48:55 -0400

>> >> >> That same argument wouldn't work for TCC.
>> >> > Why does it work for csh, then?
>> >> AFAIK csh is Free Software.
>> > Nothing you find on a typical proprietary Unix these days is Free
>> > Software.
>> Last time I checked, csh comes with a BSD license.
> I guess I confused it with ksh, sorry.
> And ksh is not the worst offender: look in sh-script, and you will see
> there, in addition to ksh, also rc from Plan 9 and even (gasp!) SCO's
> oash.

"rc" is in Debian's "main" section, so I assume it's also Free Software.
As for oash, yes, that makes no sense (how many people use that crap anyway?).
Feel free to remove it.

For ksh, there might be support in there for versions of ksh that still
aren't Free Software, but the I doubt there's much of sh-script.el's ksh
support which can't be used with a Free ksh.

> If we care so much about not supporting non-free shells, why do we
> have all those in sh-script?

Historical accident.

> The point is that we should discourage non-free software regardless of
> whether it comes from Microsoft, SCO, AT&T, or you-name-it.

Agreed.  Although, there is a bit more to it than that: e.g. we rejected
support for C# because the Mono version was so poor that it was clearly
mostly supporting the proprietary version.
I haven't followed Mono's development very closely, but I'd welcome C#
support in Emacs.

> Currently, we are biased in that respect.

I try not to.


        Stefan

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.