Re: [comp.emacs.xemacs] AUCTeX 11.84 released

David> [...] David> Which you do by calling David> ./configure David> make FTPDIR=/tmp/auctex TAG=11.84 tarball David> make FTPDIR=/tmp/auctex TAG=11.84 xemacs-package David> Then you have a completely built XEmacs package in /tmp/auctex, David> and an unpacked clean tarball in ./auctex-11.84. Are you suggesting that this would be a good starting point for inclusion in the XEmacs Package Tree? David> [...] David> And actually, it does not really require even that. It David> suffices to take the finished XEmacs package distributed by David> AUCTeX, since that contains everything that is to end up in the David> XEmacs package from Sumo, in the right places. The build procedure designed by the AUCTeX team is quite likely perfect for its job, and built against the right version of the SUMO package (there is an integration issue here right!?) it will be fine, but that doesn't make me understand a bit what is the problem in making it build within the XEmacs Package Tree. David> It is an illusion to imagine that taking the identical files David> from the source tarball instead of AUCTeX's binary XEmacs David> package is somehow going to make a legal difference: the David> copyrightable content is the same. In either case, XEmacs David> central decides that it needs not distribute the build David> infrastructure (whether from AUCTeX or from XEmacs) along with David> the binary package in order to comply with the GPL. I wasn't aware that there are legal issues here. Please explain? Yours -- %% Mats _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta