Ali Bahrami writes: > Emacs is a pretty mature package (well over 20 years old), and is > not evolving so fast that old copies are worthless. The value of
That's not what I was questioning. The part that I was questioning was whether it was a good thing to be delivering things that we know we can't update -- particularly when the whole point of the current "deliver everything" project is (as far as I understand) that the delivering party is on the hook to do updates. You're quite right that older versions of GNU emacs will work fine -- just look at my email headers. Users can easily get them (and likely without annoying and extraneous license issues) from other sources. > Finally, as more and more software becomes GPLv3, we are going to > face this issue on multiple fronts, and some answer will have to > be found. Whatever that answer is, our emacs packages can adapt to > it. In the interim, there are worse things than having some version > available. We're setting ourselves up for yet more reasons (besides the usual "resources" one) to deliver stale software if that issue and related legal problems aren't solved. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
