[ELPA] New package: xr

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
45 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Noam Postavsky
On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 at 19:11, Stefan Monnier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > BTW, did someone notice that the functionality of "pcre2el" in GNU Elpa
> > overlaps with the newly added package?
>
> I missed that.  Could you mention it in the Commentary (I already added
> a mention of lex-parse-re which also overlaps)?

pcre2el is not in GNU ELPA, as far as I know.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Michael Heerdegen
Noam Postavsky <[hidden email]> writes:

> pcre2el is not in GNU ELPA, as far as I know.

Oh, yes, indeed.  I have it in ".emacs.d/elpa/pcre2el-20161120.2103" and
only read "elpa" but that's just where all the stuff gets installed.

Sorry,

Michael.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Stefan Monnier
In reply to this post by Noam Postavsky
>> > BTW, did someone notice that the functionality of "pcre2el" in GNU Elpa
>> > overlaps with the newly added package?
>> I missed that.  Could you mention it in the Commentary (I already added
>> a mention of lex-parse-re which also overlaps)?
> pcre2el is not in GNU ELPA, as far as I know.

It's still Free Software, so it's not a reason not to mention it,


        Stefan

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Richard Stallman
In reply to this post by Stefan Monnier
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

Did we get a copyright assignment for xr?

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Mattias Engdegård-2
In reply to this post by Stefan Monnier
6 feb. 2019 kl. 01.11 skrev Stefan Monnier <[hidden email]>:
>
>> BTW, did someone notice that the functionality of "pcre2el" in GNU Elpa
>> overlaps with the newly added package?
>
> I missed that.  Could you mention it in the Commentary (I already added
> a mention of lex-parse-re which also overlaps)?

Done.

It is a much more ambitious package but seems to suffer from some bugs. I'm not sure if it is maintained.
I'll contact the author.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Eli Zaretskii
In reply to this post by Richard Stallman
> From: Richard Stallman <[hidden email]>
> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 02:02:01 -0500
> Cc: [hidden email]
>
> Did we get a copyright assignment for xr?

Mattias has a copyright assignment on file, yes.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

pcre2el

Richard Stallman
In reply to this post by Mattias Engdegård-2
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > It is a much more ambitious package but seems to suffer from some
  > bugs. I'm not sure if it is maintained.

As a general question, is it a good idea to keep packages in ELPA
which are not maintained?  Perhaps in some cases that is ok and in
others that is not.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Richard Stallman
In reply to this post by Eli Zaretskii
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > Did we get a copyright assignment for xr?

  > Mattias has a copyright assignment on file, yes.

Is the assignment for "changes to Emacs"?  If so, he should send a
message saying that this file constitutes a change to Emacs, and then
please send that message to [hidden email].


--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pcre2el

John Wiegley-6
In reply to this post by Richard Stallman
>>>>> "RS" == Richard Stallman <[hidden email]> writes:

RS> As a general question, is it a good idea to keep packages in ELPA which
RS> are not maintained? Perhaps in some cases that is ok and in others that is
RS> not.

If they continue to work without much intervention, I don't see much harm in
it. We don't advertise ELPA as being "curated, maintained packages" do we?

--
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Eli Zaretskii
In reply to this post by Richard Stallman
> From: Richard Stallman <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email], [hidden email]
> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 23:36:27 -0500
>
>   > Mattias has a copyright assignment on file, yes.
>
> Is the assignment for "changes to Emacs"?  If so, he should send a
> message saying that this file constitutes a change to Emacs, and then
> please send that message to [hidden email].

Sorry, I don't understand.  We don't have separate assignments for
ELPA, we have always treated packages on ELPA as being part of Emacs,
for the copyright assignment purposes.  Is that incorrect for some
reason?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: pcre2el

Stefan Monnier
In reply to this post by Richard Stallman
> As a general question, is it a good idea to keep packages in ELPA
> which are not maintained?

I don't see "maintained" as a significant part of the decision.  To me
the question should rather be whether it's still working, and whether
the code is still useful (either as a basis for other code, or for
end-users).

I've added to GNU ELPA some packages specifically because they were
unmaintained but still in use (psgml and filladapt come to mind).


        Stefan


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Richard Stallman
In reply to this post by Eli Zaretskii
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > Is the assignment for "changes to Emacs"?  If so, he should send a
  > > message saying that this file constitutes a change to Emacs, and then
  > > please send that message to [hidden email].

  > Sorry, I don't understand.  We don't have separate assignments for
  > ELPA, we have always treated packages on ELPA as being part of Emacs,
  > for the copyright assignment purposes.  Is that incorrect for some
  > reason?

That is correct, but it's a different issue.

The point is when someone contributes changes to Emacs which consist
of a separate module -- so that it isn't clearly "a change to Emacs"
-- we should ask per to affirm explicitly that it _is_ a change to
Emacs, and therefore his assignment covers it.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Stefan Monnier
> The point is when someone contributes changes to Emacs which consist
> of a separate module -- so that it isn't clearly "a change to Emacs"
> -- we should ask per to affirm explicitly that it _is_ a change to
> Emacs, and therefore his assignment covers it.

In the past we've considered explicit requests to contribute the package
to Emacs or GNU ELPA as being such a statement.


        Stefan


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Eli Zaretskii
> From: Stefan Monnier <[hidden email]>
> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 22:50:59 -0500
>
> > The point is when someone contributes changes to Emacs which consist
> > of a separate module -- so that it isn't clearly "a change to Emacs"
> > -- we should ask per to affirm explicitly that it _is_ a change to
> > Emacs, and therefore his assignment covers it.
>
> In the past we've considered explicit requests to contribute the package
> to Emacs or GNU ELPA as being such a statement.

And if that is not enough for some reason, then what exactly should
the contributor of a package say, and where, to express such a
statement?

Also, there are packages distributed with Emacs which can be
considered not "clearly" a change to Emacs -- should the same policy
be used for them?  E.g., Gnus or Org or ERC -- they are add-ons that
have no direct effect on the Emacs core.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Stephen Berman
On Fri, 08 Feb 2019 09:18:33 +0200 Eli Zaretskii <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> From: Stefan Monnier <[hidden email]>
>> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 22:50:59 -0500
>>
>> > The point is when someone contributes changes to Emacs which consist
>> > of a separate module -- so that it isn't clearly "a change to Emacs"
>> > -- we should ask per to affirm explicitly that it _is_ a change to
>> > Emacs, and therefore his assignment covers it.
>>
>> In the past we've considered explicit requests to contribute the package
>> to Emacs or GNU ELPA as being such a statement.
>
> And if that is not enough for some reason, then what exactly should
> the contributor of a package say, and where, to express such a
> statement?

Would it suffice (in addition to a copyright assignment, of course) if
the files in GNU ELPA contain this sentence?

  This file is part of GNU Emacs.

Currently, some do but many don't.

> Also, there are packages distributed with Emacs which can be
> considered not "clearly" a change to Emacs -- should the same policy
> be used for them?  E.g., Gnus or Org or ERC -- they are add-ons that
> have no direct effect on the Emacs core.

I think all (or at least all Lisp) files in those packages do contain
the above sentence, though not all files in the emacs source tree do
(e.g. README, INSTALL, CONTRIBUTE).

Steve Berman

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Richard Stallman
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > Would it suffice (in addition to a copyright assignment, of course) if
  > the files in GNU ELPA contain this sentence?

  >   This file is part of GNU Emacs.

  > Currently, some do but many don't.

IANAL, but I think that all of the source files in ELPA should have
the standard license notice, including saying "part of GNU Emacs" --
if for legal purposes we consider it part of GNU Emacs.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Richard Stallman
In reply to this post by Stefan Monnier
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > In the past we've considered explicit requests to contribute the package
  > to Emacs or GNU ELPA as being such a statement.

IANAL but I worry that that may not be explicit enough to it clear to
outsiders that the file will become part of Emacs.  When you are
talking to a person who works with you in a group, you can easily
convey a point clearly _to per_ with words that won't convey the point
clearly to outsiders.

So if we want to rely on this, we should make sure to make that invitation
explicitly clear about this very point.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Richard Stallman
In reply to this post by Eli Zaretskii
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > And if that is not enough for some reason, then what exactly should
  > the contributor of a package say, and where, to express such a
  > statement?

I expect that saying "my file foo is a change to Emacs" is enough.

  > Also, there are packages distributed with Emacs which can be
  > considered not "clearly" a change to Emacs -- should the same policy
  > be used for them?  E.g., Gnus or Org or ERC -- they are add-ons that
  > have no direct effect on the Emacs core.

We treat ERC, Gnus and Org Mode as parts of Emacs for copyright purposes.

--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Eli Zaretskii
In reply to this post by Richard Stallman
> From: Richard Stallman <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email], [hidden email], [hidden email]
> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 22:37:15 -0500
>
>   > Would it suffice (in addition to a copyright assignment, of course) if
>   > the files in GNU ELPA contain this sentence?
>
>   >   This file is part of GNU Emacs.
>
>   > Currently, some do but many don't.
>
> IANAL, but I think that all of the source files in ELPA should have
> the standard license notice, including saying "part of GNU Emacs" --
> if for legal purposes we consider it part of GNU Emacs.

Would doing that in the source file be enough to serve as a legal
statement that the Emacs copyright assignment covers the package?  Or
will something else be required?

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [ELPA] New package: xr

Eli Zaretskii
In reply to this post by Richard Stallman
> From: Richard Stallman <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email], [hidden email]
> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 22:38:00 -0500
>
>   > And if that is not enough for some reason, then what exactly should
>   > the contributor of a package say, and where, to express such a
>   > statement?
>
> I expect that saying "my file foo is a change to Emacs" is enough.

Saying where?

>   > Also, there are packages distributed with Emacs which can be
>   > considered not "clearly" a change to Emacs -- should the same policy
>   > be used for them?  E.g., Gnus or Org or ERC -- they are add-ons that
>   > have no direct effect on the Emacs core.
>
> We treat ERC, Gnus and Org Mode as parts of Emacs for copyright purposes.

I know, but what I don't understand is how ERC etc. are different from
a package stored on ELPA.  Could you please clarify the difference, if
there is one?

123