[comp.emacs.xemacs] AUCTeX 11.84 released

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Mats Lidell writes:

 > OK. I think I see your point. If there is a "full source code" claim
 > and it is found offensive I think IMHO that it should be dropped. 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)

No, if David is correct then our distribution is incomplete, it does
not comply with the GPL, it is an unlicensed copyright infringement,
and we must stop distributing it in the current form.  It's true that
the FSF has been fairly lenient in the interpretation of the clauses
about *how* the licensee distributes source, but I'm very sure that
*we* must distribute the source because we do have access to it.

The question is whether our package distribution is a complete source
distribution or not.  I believe that it is under the GPL's definition.