Re: Vendoring code in a (Non?)GNU ELPA package

[Daniel Semyonov]

>>>>> Richard Stallman writes:

    >> I think the intention is to "vendor" miniaudio.h with your
    >> program (not sure if I'm using the term correctly),

    > Can you please state what you mean in different words?  "Vendonr"
    > is a noun, not a verb, and that noun is usually meaningless in the
    > context of free software.  As a result, I can't imagine what a
    > verb "to vendor" would mean.

Sure, what I meant was to include the file "miniaudio.h" as part of the
package.  "miniaudio.h" is not a usual C header file, it actually
contains all the code of the miniaudio library, so in effect this will
make the package mostly 3rd party code (which is why I assume this isn't
acceptable).
However, since only a few distributions package miniaudio, this seems
like it would be the most convenient option for users.

I don't know why miniaudio is distributed this way, I'm assuming there
is some benefit to this method that I don't understand because I don't
have much experience with C programming.