On 20/10/2022 06:46, Jean Louis wrote:
* Max Nikulin [2022-10-19 15:53]:
The person may be already familiar with that non-free apps. We had
a chance to ask about features missed in free applications and actual
experience. Perhaps the same tasks may be performed in a bit different
and less
On 23/10/2022 22:27, Ypo wrote:
https://git.sr.ht/~bzg/worg/tree/master/item/org-faq.org#L4502
I have cloned the "repository" hoping it works like in github, but I see
no option to edit.
SourceHut does not have an online editor, it is necessary to clone the
repository to local disk.
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 12:12:46AM +1100, Tim Cross wrote:
[...]
> Even if it was violated, this is not something the maintainers are
> empowered to act on anyway [...]
This depends perhaps on what one understands by "act on". If that
means "go to court" you are, of course, right. If that means
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Jean Louis writes:
>
>>> If it is true, could you please provide links to legal basis on from
>>> GPL's and Swedish law's points of view?
>>
>> In my opinion the term "Org Mode" is collective trademark:
>>
>> Trademark FAQs | USPTO:
>>
Jean Louis writes:
>> If it is true, could you please provide links to legal basis on from
>> GPL's and Swedish law's points of view?
>
> In my opinion the term "Org Mode" is collective trademark:
>
> Trademark FAQs | USPTO:
>
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-25 10:30]:
> > These words cheat the reader by telling that it is "compatible"
> > something, while it is not editor mode, it is probably whole editor
> > and software without Emacs.
>
> Are you saying that there is GPL violation of Org mode licence by this
> "EasyOrg"
Jean Louis writes:
> Additionally "Org Mode" qualifies as trademark in Sweden, where this
> company is registered.
>
> I advise to Org Mode authors to defend against plagiarism, as they
> call it Emacs Org Mode -- which is not. I do not mind if anybody will
> complain or not -- I am only
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-24 05:52]:
>
> Except for https://easyPLAGIARISM.com/, feel free to send a patch
> against
Pure Plagiarism.
Getting customers for proprietary software through Org mailing list.
Plagiarists getting smarter and smarter.
* Overview of noun plagiarism
The noun
Ypo writes:
> I don't know how to send patches.
>
> I have found the place where I want to add some lines:
>
> https://git.sr.ht/~bzg/worg/tree/master/item/org-faq.org#L4502
>
>
> I have cloned the "repository" hoping it works like in github, but I see
> no option to edit.
See
ypuntot writes:
> Could these be added there?
>
> https://github.com/DanielDe/org-web
> https://easyorgmode.com/
> https://github.com/amake/orgro
> https://logseq.com/
Except for https://easyorgmode.com/, feel free to send a patch against
https://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html#org0a6fc30 in
Hi
I don't know how to send patches.
I have found the place where I want to add some lines:
https://git.sr.ht/~bzg/worg/tree/master/item/org-faq.org#L4502
I have cloned the "repository" hoping it works like in github, but I see
no option to edit.
If I click on "prepare a patchset" I can
* Max Nikulin [2022-10-19 15:53]:
> Better balanced position is necessary otherwise it would be just weakness in
> communication with people who do not care if some software is free.
Then such people have the chance to learn what is free software. Their
weakness is not to know what it is.
> > I
On 17/10/2022 18:54, Jean Louis wrote:
Though for that, we can't steer users to review non-free software as
that means to let them give up on their freedom.
I am unsure who has intention to steer users to non-free software. There
was a message mentioning some application. I assume that the
Max Nikulin writes:
> On 16/10/2022 06:01, Juan Manuel Macías wrote:
>> ypuntot writes:
>>
>>> https://easyorgmode.com/
>> Proprietary license. This should not be recommended here
>> (https://easyorgmode.com/terms).
>
> I did not expected that this topic would become so hot.
I didn't expect
On 16/10/2022 06:01, Juan Manuel Macías wrote:
ypuntot writes:
https://easyorgmode.com/
Proprietary license. This should not be recommended here
(https://easyorgmode.com/terms).
I did not expected that this topic would become so hot.
Let's ignore that easyorg does not run on Android and
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-17 16:18]:
> Jean Louis writes:
>
> > However, IMHO and according to principles of free software, such as
> > not to steer users towards non-free software, then no links to
> > proprietary software shall be added from Org website pages, as Org is
> > part of Emacs
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-17 15:06]:
> So, we may link to non-free software, but only for the purposes other
> than encouraging to use it. This is a tricky distinction to master
> though. In your interpretation that we are going to promote using that
> non-free software, you are right. But I
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-17 15:52]:
> Jean Louis writes:
>
> >> Having said that, my judgment may be still poor. I'd be happy to hear
> >> that I am wrong from Jean.
> >
> > Sorry I am lost, I have no idea to what the above refers.
>
> I was referring to my previous statement that
> "WRT
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-17 14:56]:
> Mostly in order to identify what we can improve in Org to remove the
> temptation to use that proprietary software. Fear to _not_ hear about why
> the proprietary software was even listed was the main motivator of my
> reply to your message.
Your above
Jean Louis writes:
> However, IMHO and according to principles of free software, such as
> not to steer users towards non-free software, then no links to
> proprietary software shall be added from Org website pages, as Org is
> part of Emacs which is part of GNU fully free operating system
>
Jean Louis writes:
>> Having said that, my judgment may be still poor. I'd be happy to hear
>> that I am wrong from Jean.
>
> Sorry I am lost, I have no idea to what the above refers.
I was referring to my previous statement that
"WRT the Org apps, we are discussing things, and you are trying
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-16 18:02]:
> Clarification: I was actually referring to Jean's email. (I did not look
> at the sender and just now realized that you are not Jean)
>
> Having said that, my judgment may be still poor. I'd be happy to hear
> that I am wrong from Jean.
Sorry I am lost, I
* Max Nikulin [2022-10-16 19:10]:
> On 16/10/2022 14:32, Jean Louis wrote:
> > * Max Nikulin [2022-10-16 08:28]:
> > > I do not have strong opinion concerning proprietary application.
> > > Requirements for worg section as driven by user content are not so strict
> > > as
> > > for the main part
Jean Louis writes:
> Yes, it is common sense that in GNU project we do not steer users
> towards proprietary systems.
>
> This means that in GNU software, mailing lists and chat, and websites,
> we do not point to proprietary systems as non-free programs are
> injustice, and we shall not bring
Jean Louis writes:
>> WRT the Org apps, we are discussing things, and you are
>> trying to put stop on this discussion. I find it a bit too
>> aggressive.
>
> Don't feel bad for that. That was nothing personal. Nobody minds who
> uses privately non-free software. Though why discuss or list
>
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-16 12:25]:
> Jean Louis writes:
>
> > If I am not mistaken, you propose or initiate discussing how to list
> > proprietary software on some websites.
> >
> > GNU mailing lists are not for such discussions. GNU is project is
> > there to foster full free software.
>
>
* Ihor Radchenko [2022-10-16 16:04]:
> > Documented or undocumented, it's common sense. This is a mailing list of
> > the GNU project, and it is hoped that this list will not recommend the
> > use of unethical software that does not comply with the GNU philosophy.
>
> Discussing and recommending
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Clarification: I was actually referring to Jean's email. (I did not look
> at the sender and just now realized that you are not Jean)
>
> Having said that, my judgment may be still poor. I'd be happy to hear
> that I am wrong from Jean.
Apologies for the
On 16/10/2022 14:32, Jean Louis wrote:
* Max Nikulin [2022-10-16 08:28]:
I do not have strong opinion concerning proprietary application.
Requirements for worg section as driven by user content are not so strict as
for the main part of the Org site that must adhere to FSF rules. Perhaps it
is
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
> Ihor Radchenko writes:
>
>> WRT the Org apps, we are discussing things, and you are
>> trying to put stop on this discussion. I find it a bit too aggressive.
>
> What I have done is simply to remind that a specific application is not
> free and should not be
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> WRT the Org apps, we are discussing things, and you are
> trying to put stop on this discussion. I find it a bit too aggressive.
What I have done is simply to remind that a specific application is not
free and should not be recommended here (the user who has cited that
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
> Ihor Radchenko writes:
>
>> Jean Louis writes:
>>
>>> If I am not mistaken, you propose or initiate discussing how to list
>>> proprietary software on some websites.
>>>
>>> GNU mailing lists are not for such discussions. GNU is project is
>>> there to foster full
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Jean Louis writes:
>
>> If I am not mistaken, you propose or initiate discussing how to list
>> proprietary software on some websites.
>>
>> GNU mailing lists are not for such discussions. GNU is project is
>> there to foster full free software.
>
> Do you know where
Jean Louis writes:
> If I am not mistaken, you propose or initiate discussing how to list
> proprietary software on some websites.
>
> GNU mailing lists are not for such discussions. GNU is project is
> there to foster full free software.
Do you know where this rule is documented?
--
Ihor
* Max Nikulin [2022-10-16 08:28]:
> On 16/10/2022 01:31, ypuntot wrote:
> > Could these be added there?
> >
> > https://github.com/DanielDe/org-web
> > https://easyorgmode.com/
> > https://github.com/amake/orgro
> > https://logseq.com/
>
> At least some brief description of real advantages from
On 16/10/2022 01:31, ypuntot wrote:
Could these be added there?
https://github.com/DanielDe/org-web
https://easyorgmode.com/
https://github.com/amake/orgro
https://logseq.com/
At least some brief description of real advantages from actual users is
necessary. Copy-paste from the project site
And I am reading that it is not for Android; just Linux, Windows and Mac.
Definitively, shouldn't go there.
El 16/10/2022 a las 1:01, Juan Manuel Macías escribió:
ypuntot writes:
https://easyorgmode.com/
Proprietary license. This should not be recommended here
ypuntot writes:
> https://easyorgmode.com/
Proprietary license. This should not be recommended here
(https://easyorgmode.com/terms).
Could these be added there?
https://github.com/DanielDe/org-web
https://easyorgmode.com/
https://github.com/amake/orgro
https://logseq.com/
> Re: Best android app
> From: Ihor Radchenko
> Subject: Re: Best android app
> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 09:16:13 +0800
> Renato Po
Try these Org applications for Android:
https://search.f-droid.org/?q=org+mode=en
--
Jean
Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns
In support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
Renato Pontefice writes:
> Sorry…I just realize that I’ve not tell for what I’m looking for the best
> application…. :-(
>
> It’s for open .org file!
> I would see my org-mode file I’ve created on my emacs on my Mac and check
> every things…
https://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html#org0a6fc30
Renato Pontefice writes:
> Sorry…I just realize that I’ve not tell for what I’m looking for the best
> application…. :-(
>
> It’s for open .org file!
> I would see my org-mode file I’ve created on my emacs on my Mac and check
> every things…
If you want to have a (more or less) complete
t; ha scritto:
>
> Hi,
> I’m wondering with is the best Android app to use on my phone.
>
> Thank you
>
> Renato
lease use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
.
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022, Renato Pontefice wrote:
> Hi,
> I?m wondering with is the best Android app to use on my phone.
>
> Thank you
>
> Renato
>
Hi,
I’m wondering with is the best Android app to use on my phone.
Thank you
Renato
45 matches
Mail list logo
