Re: reftex needs to be upgraded.

Wei Weng <wweng(a)acedsl.com&gt; writes: It is not a matter of simplicity or technical necessity. It is a matter of heeding the GPL under which substantial components used in XEmacs have been licensed _to_ the XEmacs team. The GPL states The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source form of a work. [...] The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities. The preferred form for creating an XEmacs package most certainly is the form built in the XEmacs package repository. It is so much preferred that the XEmacs team steadfastly refuses to distribute any XEmacs package built in a different manner. Nevertheless, the controlling files and scripts (like XEmacs.rules) are not distributed with the package or made available in any of the forms permitted by the GPL. When you tell that to Stephen, he will use any of a variety of excuses all of which don't hold water, and all of which he will not actually defend when you point out why they don't hold water. Instead he'll bring up something different which does not hold water either. That is not the way to address a problem. I am quite aware that blustering them away is not just the standard XEmacs way for dealing with reported legal problems: I had similar experiences with bugs and documentation problems. In my opinion, any defense for such non-action is a waste of resources because it does not lead to progress. -- 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