Re: xemacs vs emacs
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
David Kastrup writes:
> Just what I said: Apple IP does not play into it at all. You are
> confusing this with Apple mindshare: GNU software, at least GNU Emacs,
> does not strive to implement features
Um, no. According to Stefan and Richard, GNU Emacs refuses to accept
such features even if the author is happy to contribute them.
Why "no"? That's just a paraphrase.
> that enhance Emacs only on proprietary platforms.
What is so hard to understand about "IP == proprietary"?
That it is nonsense? "IP" is an abbreviation for "intellectual
property", a term used for copyrights, trademarks and patents. Neither
of those prohibit folding the Aquamacs code into Emacs (Emacs itself
uses copyright to protect its code base). However, Apple's general
usage of those "IP" constructs renders MacOSX a proprietary platform.
That makes the platform second class to free operating systems for the
goals of the GNU project. Which means that the GNU project will not
choose to increase Apple's mindshare at the cost of free software, in
particular GNU.
So no changes are accepted into Emacs proper that make proprietary
platforms in some way preferable to free platforms. This is not a legal
requirement in any manner: you might call it a whim. Except, of course,
that it is, while not a legal necessity, not arbitrary at all either.
--
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