[comp.emacs.xemacs] AUCTeX 11.84 released
dak at gnu.org
Tue Jan 23 18:37:41 EST 2007
Mats Lidell <matsl at xemacs.org> writes:
>>>>>> David Kastrup <dak at gnu.org> writes:
> David> You have to arrange the files and write some template files.
> OK. Doesn't sound that complicated. What are the template files for?
> We are just compiling elisp-files. Where do the templates come in?
>>> I wasn't aware that there are legal issues here. Please explain?
> David> The GPL states
> Oh, that legal issue ;-)
> David> That means that a binary package can't be rebuilt by
> David> unpacking it into the XEmacs package build structure, yet the
> David> XEmacs team claims that it delivers "full source code".
> OK. I think I see your point. If there is a "full source code" claim
> and it is found offensive
You are on the wrong track. There is a "full source code" claim on
the group whenever this issue crops up. The problem is not that it is
offensive, but that it is factually wrong.
> I think IMHO that it should be dropped.
Sure, but the consequence would be that the package contents would
have to be changed accordingly. That means work (where it is not
clear who would have time to do it), and loss of face. So it is
easier to see how one gets along with denial.
> A reference to the AUCTeX-package and where it can be found should
> suffice though to satisfy the GPL (But I'm no lawyer etc etc)
Obviously not, since the GPL clearly states that the complete
machine-readable source code has to either accompany the package, be
available from the same download location (and a non-mirrored CVS
access is not the same download location as a mirrored ftp server), or
a written offer to supply it has to accompany the distribution (there
is another option, but it does not apply here).
This makes sense if you think of it: if a private person offers some
program of his under the GPL, and a large company takes this program
and sells 10 million binaries, then it would not be fair if the
creator's server bogged down because the source can only be had there.
So the deal with the GPL is that the person responsible for the
binaries is also responsible for the source.
That does not mean that XEmacs central is not free to throw away
Makefile and autoconf from upstream and replace them by whatever is
more convenient for them, but it does mean that whatever they replace
it with for the sake of building this particular package has to
accompany the package or be downloadable from the same location.
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
More information about the XEmacs-Beta