Re: NonGNU ELPA package submission: EPIO

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > >From looking at the license list, the MPL2.0 is compatible (it's the
  > MPL1.0 that is incompatible) with the GPL (I usually use it due to its
  > weaker copyleft, which avoids software being "open source" but not
  > "free" just because of the license of a dependency),

I can't relate those words to anything I know about the MPL 2 and free
software, so I wonder if a misunderstanding might be involved.
How might this result in a program that is open source but not free?
That result does happen, but I don't see what in this situation
could have that effect.

Would you like to spell out the scenatio that you have in mind, and
how it might result in a program that is open source but not free?
Then we could determine whether it is a misunderstanding.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)