[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch moves to GPL v3 or later

From: Stephen J. Turnbull
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GNU Arch moves to GPL v3 or later
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2007 05:02:58 +0900

Thomas Lord writes:
 > Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
 > > You might want to revise your history lesson about what Richard
 > > thinks.
 > >
 > > Hint, it had nothing to do with copyright assignments.
 > >   
 > It was a an early instance of a pattern that has proved reliable,
 > since those days:
 > A project (like Emacs) gets to a stage of development

If you want to go there, I'd be happy to :-), but please note that I
was not talking about the Great Fork of 1994, I was talking about the
*present* state of affairs where XEmacs developers regularly merge code
from Emacs with minimal effort or discussion, while Emacs developers
generally do not consider using XEmacs code at all unless the author
is easily available to sign an assignment.  And some are afraid to even
look at it (in discussions with Ben Wing, Ken Handa went to the length
of removing the whiteboard markers from the room so that no code would
be fixed in a medium -- I hope that was a joke!)

Stefan will probably put it a bit differently, as I believe he
personally has done some reverse synching, but I'm pretty sure he will
confirm that the legal hurdles are much lower and the amount of code
synching much higher in the Emacs -> XEmacs direction than the reverse.
I doubt he will deny that the legal hurdles are a big factor in
reducing the reverse sync flow to a trickle.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]