[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: official Emacs Docker image
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: official Emacs Docker image |
Date: |
Fri, 30 Dec 2016 16:36:42 -0500 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> I see now that I was unclear: A Docker image is a self-contained tarball
> containing a GNU/Linux kernel, necessary system software, and the final
Emacs
> executable that was built by the image recipe.
Now it is coherent.
> The Docker image contents, thus, can be entirely free software. Executing
the
> image on some platforms (such as Windows) may use proprietary software to
> perform the execution (for example, VM provisioning software).
I see how it makes sense to use this on Windows. But it seems absurd
to use this on GNU/Linux. Why does anyone do that?
How big would such a docker image be? I know that disks are getting
bigger, but how many such applications could fit on a typical laptop?
However, I don't see any ethical issue about making and distributing
Docker images of Emacs as long as we get the details right: for
instance, use an endorsed free GNU/Linux distro.
Do you see any specific issues we need to consider?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.