ox-html.el removal

ox-html.el removal

[Jambunathan K]

I would like to remove ox-html.el from Org distribution.  My
relationship with ox-html.el is a bit complicated and I am not sure how
far I can go forward on this front.

I am willing to go as far is humanly possible for me to have my
displeasure registered.

-- 

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Detlef Steuer]

> I am willing to go as far is humanly possible for me to have my
> displeasure registered.
> 

Dear Jambunathan, 

your displeasure is very well registered by the hundreds or even
thousands of readers of this list. 

It is very sad to see an obviously very gifted and energetic programmer
going in "lonely fighter mode" without obvious reasons.

But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
this case I assume. 
No developer may ever have the rights to destroy afterwards what nice
piece of work he once gave to the community!

I must admit the FSF is to praise. It always seemed  a bit restrictive
to me to demand that time consuming process of sending the paperworks
all over the world. Now I understand. 

You authored valuable parts of orgmode, yes. And you promised
and decided, through signing the FSF papers, to never take it away
again.  

Now you changed your mind. Humans, even programmers, change
their mind. Nevertheless there is your promise on paper, signed by you.
It is impossible for you to take anything away now and, morally,
that's the right thing, too. Otherwise some contributors could easily
destroy communities and their spirit at will whenever their
mind would change. 

So, thanks for your great contributions! No kidding here. 

Find some peace of mind.

Best regards
Detlef










> -- 
> 
> 

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 10.03.2013 19:55, schrieb Detlef Steuer:
>
>> I am willing to go as far is humanly possible for me to have my
>> displeasure registered.
>>
>
> Dear Jambunathan,
>
> your displeasure is very well registered by the hundreds or even
> thousands of readers of this list.
>
> It is very sad to see an obviously very gifted and energetic programmer
> going in "lonely fighter mode" without obvious reasons.
>
> But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
> this case I assume.
> No developer may ever have the rights to destroy afterwards what nice
> piece of work he once gave to the community!
>
> I must admit the FSF is to praise. It always seemed  a bit restrictive
> to me to demand that time consuming process of sending the paperworks
> all over the world. Now I understand.
>
> You authored valuable parts of orgmode, yes. And you promised
> and decided, through signing the FSF papers, to never take it away
> again.
>
> Now you changed your mind. Humans, even programmers, change
> their mind. Nevertheless there is your promise on paper, signed by you.
> It is impossible for you to take anything away now and, morally,
> that's the right thing, too. Otherwise some contributors could easily
> destroy communities and their spirit at will whenever their
> mind would change.
>
> So, thanks for your great contributions! No kidding here.
>
> Find some peace of mind.
>
> Best regards
> Detlef
>
>

Hi Detlef,

thanks for your kind words.

Just a remark to copyright assignment though, as I always thought it being wrong:
it doesn't interfere here.

Once code is published under GPL, don't see a way to revoke the license.
GPL'ed code is all what's needed for distribution.

Best,

Andreas

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Christopher Schmidt]

Detlef Steuer <detlef.steuer@gmx.de> writes:
> But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
> this case I assume.

That's not right.

    https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html

I am not a copyright lawyer.  So is everyone else subscribed to this
list.  The FSF's copyright clerk should assist on this issue.

#+BEGIN my2cents
If Jambunathan does not want code he wrote to be part of Org any more,
I'd respect his wish.  At first sight this is a loss for Org.  This
does not need to be the end, though.  GSoC is coming up, rewriting
specific exporter look like great projects.

Jambunathan did not mention what is going to happen to his code.

Jambu, are you going to maintain the code you wrote separately.  If so,
is code free, libre and upwards compatible to future Org releases?
#+END

A long yet somewhat relevant read:

    https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/
    http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.gnutls.devel/6465

        Christopher

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Christopher,

Christopher Schmidt <christopher@ch.ristopher.com> writes:

> #+BEGIN my2cents
> If Jambunathan does not want code he wrote to be part of Org any more,
> I'd respect his wish.  At first sight this is a loss for Org.  This
> does not need to be the end, though.  GSoC is coming up, rewriting
> specific exporter look like great projects.

I don't think it is in the community's best interest to respect
Jambunathan's wish. I agree with you that losing code he contributed
would be a loss for the Org community.  Why should our community
sustain such a loss?

On the other hand, I think your GSoC idea is a good one.  Working with
Nicolas' export framework would be a terrific experience for students.
If the GSoC coders come up with a functional replacement for ox-html,
then we can choose to use the replacement, instead.  I guess this would
be Nicolas call as potential mentor?

I think the Org community might want to decide whether or not to accept
patches from Jambunathan K in the future.  I don't think we are under
any obligation to accept his contributions.

All the best,
Tom

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Alan L Tyree]

On 11/03/13 06:30, Christopher Schmidt wrote:
> Detlef Steuer <detlef.steuer@gmx.de> writes:
>> But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
>> this case I assume.
>
> That's not right.
>
>      https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
>
> I am not a copyright lawyer.  So is everyone else subscribed to this
> list.  The FSF's copyright clerk should assist on this issue.

That may be why the FSF *wants* copyright, but that hardly matters. The 
fact is (I presume) that copyright *was* assigned to the FSF and 
therefore the FSF is the entity that can determine the rights of copy, 
distribution, etc of the code.

This is very common in publishing: the author is asked to assign 
copyright to the publisher, and it is then the publisher who has rights 
formerly held by the author.

Cheers,
Alan


>
> #+BEGIN my2cents
> If Jambunathan does not want code he wrote to be part of Org any more,
> I'd respect his wish.  At first sight this is a loss for Org.  This
> does not need to be the end, though.  GSoC is coming up, rewriting
> specific exporter look like great projects.
>
> Jambunathan did not mention what is going to happen to his code.
>
> Jambu, are you going to maintain the code you wrote separately.  If so,
> is code free, libre and upwards compatible to future Org releases?
> #+END
>
> A long yet somewhat relevant read:
>
>      https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/
>      http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.gnutls.devel/6465
>
>          Christopher
>
>


-- 
Alan L Tyree                    http://www2.austlii.edu.au/~alan
Tel:  04 2748 6206		sip:172385@iptel.org

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Jambunathan K]

Christopher Schmidt <christopher@ch.ristopher.com> writes:

> Detlef Steuer <detlef.steuer@gmx.de> writes:
>> But: The papers the FSF asked you to sign were constructed for exactly
>> this case I assume.
>
> That's not right.
>
>     https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.html
>
> I am not a copyright lawyer.  So is everyone else subscribed to this
> list.  The FSF's copyright clerk should assist on this issue.

I really am not discussing what I am going to do with people on this
list.  My disagreements are past discussion.

My code has not landed in Emacs and Org-8.0 is not released.

> #+BEGIN my2cents
> If Jambunathan does not want code he wrote to be part of Org any more,
> I'd respect his wish.  At first sight this is a loss for Org.  This
> does not need to be the end, though.  

> GSoC is coming up, rewriting specific exporter look like great
> projects.

You can write exporters even if they are available elsewhere.  

That said, Writing exporters is an easy job - a low hanging fruit so to
speak - and if you are a student, I recommend that you focus on more
interesting projects that pose some challenge and provide opportunities
to think in critical manner and frustrate you in some way.

I would consider Nicolas work - Writing a parser, developing a spec,
defining APIs - etc as a project that has broader scope.  Writing
exporters is meh!.  Poor me, I have been stupid.

If you are interested in project ideas concerning Org, talk to Nicolas
Goaziou.  I am sure he will not disappoint you.  See whether you can use
element infrastructure in other heavily used parts of Org core - say
agenda generation.

Work on projects where the project maintainer has written substantial
amount of challenging code for considerable period.

Also, look for project ideas that can continue for considerable period
of time, work that you can revisit for the next GSOC or one that you can
continue after your current course work.

You want to look for work with greater scope.  Actively seek projects
where the requirements and what-is-to-be-done is either not clear or the
time investment required to achieve the goal cannot be established
apriori.

Also look for features that are new and young.  They tend to have
challenges that are easily defined but not refined.

If you are interested in Emacs, keep tracking Stefan Monnier's or Eli
Zaretskii's posts.  They drop hints during casual discussion on where
they want things improved - Concurrency support in Emacs, Eli may have
some ideas on improvement to Bi-directional support, Use of Red-Black
trees and improvement to overlays code, porting over C code to Lisp
etc.  I can dig up the mailing lists if you are interested.

I wish to more GSoC contributions in to core Emacs.


> Jambunathan did not mention what is going to happen to his code.

I don't know.  I believe it will continue to remain in repos and in
people's disks.  I cannot cleanup the whole internet, can I?

> Jambu, are you going to maintain the code you wrote separately.  If so,
> is code free, libre and upwards compatible to future Org releases?

I use Emacs (and have been using it for atleast 10 years or so).  I
support Free Software.  

Even if my combative positioning doesn't amount to anything much, I want
to throw in a little friction by the way of Bastien and the current
release.  I am stating my purpose in no uncertain terms - yes it is to
delay the release or cause confusion.

I contribute to Free Software under my pleasure - it is my time and
efforts and my resources - and I have freedom to exercise my discretion
on what conditions and what projects I contribute to.

It is possible that ox-html.el is re-written.  It is unlikely that
ox-odt.el is *not* re-written.

So I will release ox-odt.el for inclusion in to Emacs or GNU ELPA after
a 6 month or 1 year period.  My code is meant for others to use and I am
not bothered about a 6 month or a 1 year break.

> #+END

> A long yet somewhat relevant read:
>
>     https://lwn.net/Articles/529522/
>     http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.encryption.gpg.gnutls.devel/6465

I have seen these threads.  I have a casual interest in such stuff.  May
be it is time I developed a nuanced understanding of how copyright etc
works in real world.

When it comes to law, much depends on context and the context has to be
un-equivocally established by debating parties and a judge.  It is
possible that my case is different, and I will see what opinions people
have to offer.  By people, I mean people-in-the-know.

>         Christopher

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Jambunathan,

Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:

>
> Even if my combative positioning doesn't amount to anything much, I want
> to throw in a little friction by the way of Bastien and the current
> release.  I am stating my purpose in no uncertain terms - yes it is to
> delay the release or cause confusion.

Neither of these contributes to the goals of the Org community.  I
appreciate your honesty in stating them specifically, but a contributing
member of the Org community would be ashamed to share these purposes.

>
> I contribute to Free Software under my pleasure - it is my time and
> efforts and my resources - and I have freedom to exercise my discretion
> on what conditions and what projects I contribute to.
>

Yes, absolutely.  And the Org community is free to reject contributions
as it sees fit.

> So I will release ox-odt.el for inclusion in to Emacs or GNU ELPA after
> a 6 month or 1 year period.  My code is meant for others to use and I am
> not bothered about a 6 month or a 1 year break.

Good news.  I look forward to the release of this code.  It would be
great if you could announce the release on our mailing list.

All the best,
Tom

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Carsten Dominik]

On 11.3.2013, at 05:08, Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Even if my combative positioning doesn't amount to anything much, I want
> to throw in a little friction by the way of Bastien and the current
> release.  I am stating my purpose in no uncertain terms - yes it is to
> delay the release or cause confusion.

I don't think there is any confusion pertaining to the 8.0 release.  These files were brought into the Org-mode repository, marked as GPL from the start, so there are no formal issues including them in 8.0 in their current form.  Wether ox-odt.el should be moved to contrib as per Achims suggestion I don't know.   I would object moving ox-html.el, it contains a lot of variable definitions, documentation strings and code I and others wrote, even if you have made the interface with org-elemets.

We will see in how far the FSF will follow your arguments and what will happen when we merge 8.0 into the Emacs distribution.  So I don't see a reason to hold up the 8.0 release.  With respect to Emacs, we will have time to resolve the issue one way or another.

- Carsten

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Jay Kerns]

Dear Carsten,

I certainly support your position.  And if *anybody's* wishes should
be honoured, I would think yours should be at the top of that list,
along with the wishes of the other (at least) 4 copyright holders' of
ox-html.el.

Cheers,
Jay



On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Carsten Dominik
<carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 11.3.2013, at 05:08, Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Even if my combative positioning doesn't amount to anything much, I want
>> to throw in a little friction by the way of Bastien and the current
>> release.  I am stating my purpose in no uncertain terms - yes it is to
>> delay the release or cause confusion.
>
> I don't think there is any confusion pertaining to the 8.0 release.  These files were brought into the Org-mode repository, marked as GPL from the start, so there are no formal issues including them in 8.0 in their current form.  Wether ox-odt.el should be moved to contrib as per Achims suggestion I don't know.   I would object moving ox-html.el, it contains a lot of variable definitions, documentation strings and code I and others wrote, even if you have made the interface with org-elemets.
>
> We will see in how far the FSF will follow your arguments and what will happen when we merge 8.0 into the Emacs distribution.  So I don't see a reason to hold up the 8.0 release.  With respect to Emacs, we will have time to resolve the issue one way or another.
>
> - Carsten

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Bastien]

Hi all,

there is no reason not to include ox-html.el and ox-odt.el into Org
8.0.  As for their inclusion into Emacs, we will have time to sort
this out.

Thanks,

-- 
 Bastien

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Jambunathan K]

Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:

> We will see in how far the FSF will follow your arguments and what
> will happen when we merge 8.0 into the Emacs distribution.  So I don't
> see a reason to hold up the 8.0 release.  With respect to Emacs, we
> will have time to resolve the issue one way or another.

Meanwhile, someone should fix up the FSF assignment notice on those
files.  As far as I am concerned, it is a routine housekeeping thing and
hasn't taken effect.  I am not assigning any copyright to FSF.

ps: I don't have commit access.
-- 

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Eric Schulte]

Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:

> Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> We will see in how far the FSF will follow your arguments and what
>> will happen when we merge 8.0 into the Emacs distribution.  So I don't
>> see a reason to hold up the 8.0 release.  With respect to Emacs, we
>> will have time to resolve the issue one way or another.
>
> Meanwhile, someone should fix up the FSF assignment notice on those
> files.  As far as I am concerned, it is a routine housekeeping thing and
> hasn't taken effect.  I am not assigning any copyright to FSF.
>

It is too late, you have already assigned copyright to the FSF.  Read
the FSF assignment papers you signed before contributing to Emacs and
Org-mode.  The language is straight forward and not hard to understand.

Your stated current goal is to delay the next Org-mode release and cause
FUD [1].  I don't think these legal claims will prove a fruitful means
to that end.

Cheers,

Footnotes: 
[1]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte

Re: ox-html.el removal

[T.F. Torrey]

Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:

> Meanwhile, someone should fix up the FSF assignment notice on those
> files.  As far as I am concerned, it is a routine housekeeping thing and
> hasn't taken effect.  I am not assigning any copyright to FSF.

Section 1a of the copyright assignment agreement is very specific:

#+BEGIN_QUOTE:
  1.(a) Developer hereby agrees to assign and does hereby assign to FSF
Developer's copyright in changes and/or enhancements to the suite of
programs known as EMACS (herein called the Program), including any
accompanying documentation files and supporting files as well as the
actual program code. These changes and/or enhancements are herein called
the Works.
#+END_QUOTE:

As a signed contributor, you have already assigned copyright of your
"changes and/or enhancements" to Emacs to the FSF (and therefore to this
community).  The agreement does not limit the assignment to those that
land in an Emacs release, or those you don't change your mind about, or
anything like that.  Any changes and/or enhancements to Emacs became
property of the FSF from the moment you wrote them.

Because you are not the copyright holder, it isn't even your prerogative
to decide which license the code is released under.  It happens to be
GPL, but the code is licensed by the copyright holder, which is the FSF,
not you.

Even listing you as an author in the file is a courtesy, not an
obligation.

Furthermore, any future code you might write concerning Org is also
automatically property of the FSF, and by extension this community.  You
have no rights to it, moral or otherwise.

#+BEGIN_QUOTE:
(b) The assignment of par. 1(a) above applies to all past and future
works of Developer that constitute changes and enhancements to the
Program.
#+END_QUOTE:

With the copyright assignment in place, there is nothing to "clear up"
for the next release of Emacs.  The FSF owns the code.  You gave it to
them for "$1 and other good and valuable consideration".

There is no way to change these terms for code you have already written,
unless you can convince the FSF to assign the copyright back to you, or
win the rights through legal action, neither of which sound fruitful.

If you are unhappy granting the copyright to your future Org code to the
FSF, your only recourse is to terminate your agreement with the FSF.  I
don't precisely know how that would be done, given that the copyright
assignment document makes no provision for its cancellation, but a
simple, formal notice of termination of the agreement might suffice,
even if made only to this list, which is operated by the FSF and managed
by its representatives.

Also, if you genuinely believe that anyone (including you) has a claim
to the rights to the Emacs code you have written, Section 2 of the
copyright assignment requires you to notify them:

#+BEGIN_QUOTE:
2. Developer will report occasionally, on Developer's
initiative and whenever requested by FSF, the changes and/or
enhancements which are covered by this contract, and (to the extent
known to Developer) any outstanding rights, or claims of rights, of any
person, that might be adverse to the rights of Developer or FSF or to
the purpose of this contract.
#+END_QUOTE:

Finally, this is only my understanding of the copyright assignment, but
the terms seem straightforward and clear.  If there really is
uncertainty among the developers here about what the copyright
assignment means, we should get clarification from RMS about the intent
or FSF legal about its legal implications before it leads to a lot of
hurt feelings (or worse).

All the best,
Terry
-- 
T.F. Torrey

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Jonathan Leech-Pepin]

Hello,

T.F. Torrey writes:

> Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Meanwhile, someone should fix up the FSF assignment notice on those
>> files.  As far as I am concerned, it is a routine housekeeping thing and
>> hasn't taken effect.  I am not assigning any copyright to FSF.
>
> Section 1a of the copyright assignment agreement is very specific:
>
> #+BEGIN_QUOTE:
>   1.(a) Developer hereby agrees to assign and does hereby assign to FSF
> Developer's copyright in changes and/or enhancements to the suite of
> programs known as EMACS (herein called the Program), including any
> accompanying documentation files and supporting files as well as the
> actual program code. These changes and/or enhancements are herein called
> the Works.
> #+END_QUOTE:
>
> As a signed contributor, you have already assigned copyright of your
> "changes and/or enhancements" to Emacs to the FSF (and therefore to this
> community).  The agreement does not limit the assignment to those that
> land in an Emacs release, or those you don't change your mind about, or
> anything like that.  Any changes and/or enhancements to Emacs became
> property of the FSF from the moment you wrote them.
>
> Because you are not the copyright holder, it isn't even your prerogative
> to decide which license the code is released under.  It happens to be
> GPL, but the code is licensed by the copyright holder, which is the FSF,
> not you.
>
> Even listing you as an author in the file is a courtesy, not an
> obligation.
>
> Furthermore, any future code you might write concerning Org is also
> automatically property of the FSF, and by extension this community.  You
> have no rights to it, moral or otherwise.
>
> #+BEGIN_QUOTE:
> (b) The assignment of par. 1(a) above applies to all past and future
> works of Developer that constitute changes and enhancements to the
> Program.
> #+END_QUOTE:

Arguably there is no requirement that any code Jambunathan or any other
FSF contributor writes needs to be provided to Emacs/FSF.  If I write a
library expanding on existing content but wish to retain copyright for
myself rather than assign it to the FSF they cannot require me to do
otherwise as far as I know.  Only if I wish it to become part of Emacs
is that required.

However in this case, if you look at the earliest commits of the two
files in question (EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el and
EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-odt.el) they were both added to Org with the lines:

;; Copyright (C) 2011-2013  Free Software Foundation, Inc.

Therefore I see that as meaning that they are copyright by FSF and the
copyright assignment cannot be revoked except by the holder, in this
case FSF.
[...snip]
>
> All the best,
> Terry

Regards,
Jon

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Achim Gratz]

Jambunathan K writes:
> I would like to remove ox-html.el from Org distribution.  My
> relationship with ox-html.el is a bit complicated and I am not sure how
> far I can go forward on this front.

Legal questions aside, which I'm not qualified to answer, here's a
german proverb:
  "Geschenkt is geschenkt, wiederholen ist gestohlen."
This very roughly translates to
  "The gift is given, taking it back is thievery."

Nevertheless my suggestion to the Org community is to respect your wish
and move these two files to contrib and see that they get re-implemented
for later inclusion into Emacs unencumbered by any dispute surrounding
them.

> I am willing to go as far is humanly possible for me to have my
> displeasure registered.

Rest assured we've registered it.  Another german proverb:
  "Reisende soll man nicht aufhalten."
Probably an even worse translation of this is
  "Embarking travellers should not be asked to stay."

Best of luck in your endeavours.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

Wavetables for the Waldorf Blofeld:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#BlofeldUserWavetables

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Jay Kerns]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
[snip]

> Nevertheless my suggestion to the Org community is to respect your wish
> and move these two files to contrib...

[snip]

I have to say I think Achim is really on the right track, here.  Also
for those interested in a bit of historical irony check out the commit
history of ox-html.el in black and white:

http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/log/lisp/ox-html.el
http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/log/contrib/lisp/org-e-html.el
http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/log/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el

In particular, the following was committed by Jambunathan K on
2012-02-18 with commit message, "org-e-html: New HTML exporter - a
first attempt".

diff --git a/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el b/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7079b5f
--- a/dev/null
+++ b/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el
@@ -0,0 +1,4902 @@
+;;; org-e-html.el --- HTML Back-End For Org Export Engine
+
+;; Copyright (C) 2011-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+
+;; Author: Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou at gmail dot com>
+;; Keywords: outlines, hypermedia, calendar, wp
+
+;; This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+;; it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
+;; the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
+;; (at your option) any later version.
+
+;; This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+;; GNU General Public License for more details.
+

-- 
Jay

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Jambunathan K]

Check with Nicolas and see to what percentage he agrees with what is
shown down below as on that particular date.





Jay Kerns <gjkernsysu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de> wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> Nevertheless my suggestion to the Org community is to respect your wish
>> and move these two files to contrib...
>
> [snip]
>
> I have to say I think Achim is really on the right track, here.  Also
> for those interested in a bit of historical irony check out the commit
> history of ox-html.el in black and white:
>
> http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/log/lisp/ox-html.el
> http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/log/contrib/lisp/org-e-html.el
> http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/log/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el
>
> In particular, the following was committed by Jambunathan K on
> 2012-02-18 with commit message, "org-e-html: New HTML exporter - a
> first attempt".
>
> diff --git a/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el b/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..7079b5f
> --- a/dev/null
> +++ b/EXPERIMENTAL/org-e-html.el
> @@ -0,0 +1,4902 @@
> +;;; org-e-html.el --- HTML Back-End For Org Export Engine
> +
> +;; Copyright (C) 2011-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> +
> +;; Author: Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou at gmail dot com>
> +;; Keywords: outlines, hypermedia, calendar, wp
> +
> +;; This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> +;; it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
> +;; the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
> +;; (at your option) any later version.
> +
> +;; This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> +;; but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> +;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
> +;; GNU General Public License for more details.
> +

-- 

Re: ox-html.el removal

[Rustom Mody]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2667 bytes --]

>
> A child with Asperger’s syndrome may notice that a woman in the line at
> the supermarket checkout is obese, and remark, in his or her usual tone of
> voice and volume, that the lady is fat and needs to go on a diet. The
> child’s opinion is that she should be grateful for the observation and
> advice; the likelihood that his or her mother will be embarrassed or the
> woman offended at such a rude comment is not part of the child’s thinking
> process. Other children would normally inhibit such a response, based on
> the  understanding of the other person’s thoughts and feelings. Children
> and adults with Asperger’s syndrome appear to have a greater allegiance to
> honesty and the truth than to the thoughts and feelings of others.
> [From The complete guide to Aspergers by Tony Attwood]
>

When Samuel writes short context-less mails and someone (interestingly
Jambunathan) shows irritation, Carsten firmly and gently advocates
compassion considering his difficulties

Just putting forward the possibility that Jambunathan suffers from
Aspergers and be treated with the (some?) compassion

So when Jambunathan says:
- dont wear implementer hat, just wear user hat
- the table in footnote is not confusing
- etc etc,

he probably has no clue that he is hurting people's sentiments. And
scolding him for the same is similar to scolding a color-blind person for
breaking a traffic signal.  The central feature of Aspergers is inability
to have a 'theory-of-mind' the sense that others have consciousness
analogous to ourselves.  This comes across as ridiculous egoism ('being a
jerk') when in fact its a painful cerebral defect of being unable to put
oneself in another's shoes

Of course disabled persons should not be allowed to drive if it can be
dangerous to others/themselves.
Likewise what is decided about conduct/etiquette on this list and/or
contribution to org in the larger interest, is ok by me.
Just requesting some compassion in the decision-making

Jambunathan: Maybe you think that by violently wrenching yourself out of
the org community you can start again on a clean slate elsewhere? I would
bet the problems you are facing here are not the first such in your life
and if you dont learn from these they will hardly be the last.  On the
other hand if you do learn maybe you will find that the org community is as
warm, friendly and vibrant as any you can get.

Finally a personal note: I often feel the way you do. Sitting before a
computer makes it worse. Sunshine makes it better. In particular
surya-namaskar is quite a magic potion.

Hope you can do a few before making a response

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2855 bytes --]