Re: NonGNU ELPA work

[Philip Kaludercic]

"Bozhidar Batsov" <bozhidar@batsov.dev> writes:

> I see. This seems reasonable, but I think it can be checked by whoever
> the submitter is and one doesn't need to get some agreement from the
> package authors (although it's obvious good for them to know the
> rules). If down the road a package breaks the rules it will simply be
> removed (someone is bound to notice this). Anyways, given how few
> Emacs packages today require some non-free software to work, I'm not
> particularly worried about this.

Yes, as the important word here is "depend on", not "use at all" most
cases I can imagine where someone would break this rule would also be
bad design (think of someone hard-coding Google Chrome as a browser
instead of using `browse-url').

As mentioning these rules isn't too much of a fuss, I'd even say that
bringing them up just to avoid issues in the future is even worth it, as
notifying the developers and maintainers that their package has been
added to the archive makes sense with or without these rules.

> On Sun, Jan 2, 2022, at 2:07 PM, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
>> "Bozhidar Batsov" <bozhidar@batsov.dev> writes:
>> 
>> > If something is a well structured package and it's licensed under GPL
>> > that's all we need IMO. After all NonGNU ELPA doesn't require
>> > maintainers to do anything special on their end, which means there's
>> > no real reason to contact them about it.
>> 
>> Reviewing the rules[0], the point is not to check up with every
>> contributor like with ELPA, but to ensure that the functionality must by
>> default not depend on non-free software, use SaaSS or install software
>> that is not part of {GNU,NonGNU} ELPA.
>> 
>> [0] https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/nongnu.git/tree/README.org#n133
>> 
>> -- 
>> Philip Kaludercic
>> 

-- 
        Philip Kaludercic