Re: reftex needs to be upgraded.

David> b) The GPL language of David> d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated David> place [...] David> somehow implies that sticking the files on some CVS server David> without public access and without announcement in packages or David> elsewhere is supposed to constitute "equivalent access" to David> packages widely distributed via different channels: ftp, disks, David> Linux distributions, XEmacs mirrors and so on. There's a README.SOURCES at http://ftp.xemacs.org/pub/xemacs/packages/ and in some of the mirrors (e.g., http://ftp.freenet.de/pub/ftp.xemacs.org/tux/xemacs/packages/ has it, but http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/pub/xemacs/packages/ does not). There are some problems with the current text (see http://tracker.xemacs.org/XEmacs/its/issue403), but if those are fixed, how far would that go towards addressing the problem that you see? People who get packages by downloading them from xemacs.org will presumably see the notice. Wouldn't distro providers, not XEmacs developers, be responsible for providing the equivalent information in their distros? mike _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta