From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: BeOrg Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2018 21:43:14 +0100 Message-ID: <87373om1p9.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87k1x0gnyi.fsf@gmail.com> <877et0m5im.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41149) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWTP8-0000B7-58 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:43:23 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWTP4-0004Li-8u for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:43:22 -0500 Received: from relay2-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.194]:51312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eWTP4-0004Ks-1v for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2018 15:43:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Ilya Shlyakhter's message of "Tue, 2 Jan 2018 14:48:41 -0500") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Ilya Shlyakhter Cc: emacs-orgmode Ilya Shlyakhter writes: >>as GNU software, we should not suggest to use non-free software > > But, clearly, we already do: suggesting to use MobileOrg necessarily > suggests to use iOS. > > Besides, some of the main critiques of non-free software do not apply > here: e.g. beorg doesn't lock the user into some proprietary format. I think you are missing the point. Free software is primarily about source code (the four definitions). Vendor lock-in is but one of the possible consequences of non-free software. It's still non-free. > And while it may be unethical to lure unsophisticated computer users > into freedom-relinquishing decisions the consequences of which they > may not fully grasp, most Org users are sophisticated enough to make > an intelligent and informed choice. Straw man argument. > GNU itself distributes Emacs for Windows from its main site ( > http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/ ), so there's a balance of > considerations. I think here the balance tips in favor of mentioning > beOrg. I've tried MobileOrg and gave up on it, while beOrg is more > usable; judging by the reviews, others had a similar impression. beOrg may be technically superior, yet usability has never been a criterion. Really there's no balance at all: this software doesn't use any of our libraries and doesn't share our goals. I'm happy someone developed such software, really, but the way it was done saddens me. If you think that is worth the shot, you may want to convince its author to turn beOrg into free software (is that even possible on the Apple store?). In any case, you may want to discuss this further on gnu-misc-discuss mailing list, or possibly emacs-devel. For the time being, as far as Org is concerned, I stand on my ground: there is no reason to reference it in the manual.