Re: PL support

[Stefan Monnier]

> I don't know what are MELPA-libre or ELPA Contrib.

I proposed "MELPA-Libre" to mean a hypothetical archive, presumably
managed under `melpa.org` which would contain a subset of MELPA limited
to packages that do not promote proprietary software.
Whether this can be arranged with the MELPA guys, I have no idea, nor do
I know who would curate it.

"ELPA-Contrib" was proposed to mean a hypothetical archive alongside GNU
ELPA, with no copyright paperwork requirement (and basically no abiding
by our coding convention either).

The difference between the two is largely that "ELPA-Contrib" would be
under `elpa.gnu.org` whereas "MELPA-Libre" would be under `melpa.org`.

> It sounds like they are ideas, not real repositories.

Indeed, they're proposals.

> If the intent is to create package repositories that are not part of
> the Emacs project, I have no objections (and even if I did, people
> could rightfully ignore them).

That's not how this works: the only reason for repositories like
"ELPA-Contrib" or "MELPA-Libre" to exist would be that contrary to MELPA
they'd be included in `package-archives` by default.

So if you refuse to include them in `package-archives`, then the
hypothetical repositories won't exist: people can't just ignore
your objections.


        Stefan