Uwe Brauer o...@mat.ucm.es writes:
Just one non philosophical remark: I wish it were possible either to
digitally sign those papers, or sent a scanned version of the signed
document instead of a smail. However that might also depend on the
current legislation...
That's already possible for
On 2015-04-12, at 17:30, Mosè Giordano m...@gnu.org wrote:
Hi Marcin!
2015-04-12 17:13 GMT+02:00 Marcin Borkowski mb...@mbork.pl:
Hello all,
I have just subscribed to this list, so I'd like to say hello and thanks
for AUCTeX!
I'm a long time TeX user (about 20 years) and Emacs user
Hi Marcin!
2015-04-12 17:13 GMT+02:00 Marcin Borkowski mb...@mbork.pl:
Hello all,
I have just subscribed to this list, so I'd like to say hello and thanks
for AUCTeX!
I'm a long time TeX user (about 20 years) and Emacs user (about 15
years). I've been using AUCTeX since I started using
Hello all,
I have just subscribed to this list, so I'd like to say hello and thanks
for AUCTeX!
I'm a long time TeX user (about 20 years) and Emacs user (about 15
years). I've been using AUCTeX since I started using Emacs itself.
However, there are quite a few things missing in AUCTeX which
Marcin Borkowski mb...@mbork.pl writes:
Oh. This probably settles the thing. I had some hope that AUCTeX is
outside the scope of this FSF-papers insanity. I don't have those
papers signed, and unless there is some serious change (either in FSF,
or in my ethical standpoint - either one is
Marcin Borkowski mb...@mbork.pl writes:
On the other hand, I have seen a core contributor to XEmacs (which does
not generally use copyright assignments) that he would rather retract
all his work than have it relicensed under GPLv3 so that XEmacs would be
able to continue
On 2015-04-12, at 20:04, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Marcin Borkowski mb...@mbork.pl writes:
Oh. This probably settles the thing. I had some hope that AUCTeX is
outside the scope of this FSF-papers insanity. I don't have those
papers signed, and unless there is some serious change
