From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) Subject: Re: A proposal (ox-html.el/ox-odt.el) Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 08:38:15 -1000 Message-ID: References: <87ober717z.fsf@gmail.com> <87mwu9iwcp.fsf@gmail.com> <87mwu9fiu0.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <878v5tyw4c.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <87ppz4r1pu.fsf@riseup.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFU9s-0001h4-To for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:47:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFU5t-000729-PO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:42:44 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:46107) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFU5t-000724-Fh for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:38:37 -0400 Received: from public by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UFU6E-0006LP-Ow for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 19:38:58 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87ppz4r1pu.fsf@riseup.net> (W. Greenhouse's message of "Tue, 12 Mar 2013 17:02:05 +0000") 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-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: "W. Greenhouse" Cc: public-emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@plane.gmane.org, public-emacs-devel-mXXj517/zsQ@plane.gmane.org Aloha all, wgreenhouse-sGOZH3hwPm2sTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org (W. Greenhouse) writes: > Jambunathan, > > Jambunathan K writes: > >> People are disregarding my "moral rights" over my work and pushing me in >> a corner to act a certain way to serve their own interests. This I feel >> is plain wrong and an act of snatching or appropriation. >> >> Jambunathan K. > > Moral right and copyright are unrelated concepts. In the jurisdictions > that recognize "author's moral right" or "droit moral" (much of the EU > and other civil-code countries), such right is non-assignable and would > not even be affected by the FSF papers. However, in the jurisdictions > where copyright is assignable, it has nothing to do with author's moral > right. > > If we're going to discuss "moral right" in the less legalistic and more > broad sense of your rights in an ethical society as a person with > agency, I think you're disregarding the rights of prior contributors to > the ox-html program, of which you were but one of many. Those > contributors did intend the code to become part of Emacs, and, morally > as well as legally, you entered into an agreement to further that aim > when you decided to work on it. If you really do intend to take your > ball and go home, do please call a fork a fork--and also do please > recognize that you are the one "snatching" or "appropriating" a joint > work out of your own sense of pique. > >> I want to fork ox-html.el and ox-odt.el (as it stands today in Org repo) >> to GNU ELPA repo. I request that Emacs maintainers recognize the GNU >> ELPA version (maintained by me) as the authoritative official versions >> of these files that gets bundled with SUMO Emacs. > > ... > >> >> Jambunathan >> +---------------+ >> | ox-html.el +--- push Emacs maintainer >> | ox-odt.el | \----- >> | GNU ELPA | \----- +--------------------+ >> | | \-->| | >> +---------------+ | lisp/org/ox-html.el| >> ^ Push | lisp/org/ox-odt.el | >> | | | >> | +--------------------+ >> | | Other org files | >> +------+---------+ /->| | >> | | /--- | | >> | Org repo | /---- | | >> | | /--- +--------------------+ >> | +-- push >> | | >> | | >> +----------------+ >> Org maintainer > > > This makes no sense at all. It is needless busywork for the Emacs > maintainer to integrate code from one particular contributor who is unable > to cooperate with the maintainer of the project to which he > contributes. It also unnecessarily inconveniences ordinary Emacs/Org > users, who would now face a further obstacle to simply using the > software. They already have to go elsewhere to get contrib/ programs > or to use the latest version of Org; now you want to make it so that > even the release version of Org is fractured and schismed. That is > totally unacceptable. If this analysis is correct, then Jambunathan's proposal furthers his stated purpose "to delay the release [of Org] or cause confusion". I am concerned (perhaps out of ignorance) that Jambunathan's ability to contribute code to Org might be used to the same effect. Because I am keen to know that my investment in Org is being suitably protected, could someone assure me either that my concern is unfounded, i.e., that code contributed by Jambunathan can be successfully vetted so that it doesn't delay development or cause confusion, or that appropriate steps have been taken to ensure that future code contributions from Jambunathan will not become part of Org? All the best, Tom -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com