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

Ralf Angeli <angeli(a)caeruleus.net&gt; writes: Well, the GPL states [in the preamble, so just relevant to establish the spirit] Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations. [in the terms] 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. c) If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, [... not relevant here] So yes, this should be done. However, it must be pointed out that legally this does not depend on the age of the package, even though ancient packages tend to reflect worse on the reputation of the creators. But it would probably help considerably if the documentation and purported release dates of the XEmacs packages also included the date when the last synch to upstream occured. Well, I am glad that it does. I'll leave communication with the XEmacs lists about AUCTeX to you in future. I am tired of being accused of being a crybaby, bully and insulting or similar whenever bringing any issue up. Even if it is just in the wake of a release announcement for a new AUCTeX version for the sake of XEmacs users. So I'll stop announcing new AUCTeX releases to the XEmacs user list. I am just not willing to bear up with the consequences any longer. Feel free to take up the job. [Lots snipped because of agreement] Ralf, we always did this. Of _course_ we have always been providing for XEmacs users far beyond the call of duty. That is not the question. The question is whether we are doing them a favor by continuing playing the charade of being the bad bullies, crybabies, and insulters that make life hard for the XEmacs core developers. It is the combination of taking both the work and heaps of blame that I find not much use in sustaining my sanity. I am glad that your experience on the lists have been different, but then you have mostly been spared discussing "the big picture". And I am thinking that maybe the only thing we can really offer XEmacs users of AUCTeX in good conscience is a switch to Emacs, and not for lack of trying. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta