Subject: bug#59609: 29.0.50; [PATCH] Better advertise (Non-)GNU ELPA in emacs manual

From: Michael Albinus <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2023 20:47:12 +0200

Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:

>> In practice the real deciding factor *is* the copyright assignment
>> (which often ends up selecting for a kind of "philosophical agreement"
>> about the primacy of ethical goals over technical ones).
>
> I think this is just the tip of a very large iceberg, and the FAQ
> should say that explicitly.  Saying that just the CA is the difference
> is both very inaccurate and misrepresents the actual situation: NonGNU
> ELPA is a collection of packages that someone else decided could be
> useful, but we basically have nothing to do with them except hosting
> them.

FTR, I feel responsible for GNU ELPA packages in the sense that I would
debug them if necessary. For Non-GNU ELPA packages I won't (exceptions
possible).

Furthermore, we offer debbugs bug tracking for GNU ELPA packages. I
don't know whether we offer the same fon Non-GNU ELPA packages.

Best regards, Michael.