Re: License Notice for ELPA packages

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,  Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org>,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org,  Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>,
>   "Protesilaos Stavrou" <info@protesilaos.com>,  Jose E. Marchesi
>  <jemarch@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 07 Sep 2024 17:11:23 -0400
> 
> > As ELPA packages are regarded to be part of Emacs (and distributed under
> > the same license), the comment should say "is part of GNU Emacs".
> 
> I don't think it's that clear.
> It is considered as part of GNU Emacs in the sense that copyright
> assignments that cover Emacs also cover these files, but it is not
> considered as part of the GNU Emacs in the sense that it's not
> (currently) included in the distributed tarball.
> 
> So historically we have accepted both "is part of GNU Emacs" and "is NOT
> part of GNU Emacs".  IMO the better choice is to say neither.

Some ELPA packages are also part of Emacs, so I guess they should say
"is part of GNU Emacs"?

Also, what will we do when we devise a way to bundle ELPA packages
with Emacs release tarballs? rewrite the notice?  Something to keep in
mind for the future, I guess.