Re: Contradictiory directions

[Alexandre Garreau]

Le merkredo, 15-a de decembro 2021, 19-a horo kaj 28:52 CET Óscar Fuentes 
a écrit :
> >> non-free versions of the code are incompatible with the GPL after
> >> all?
> >> <sigh>
> 
> 
> 
> > No, but enough for them to *potentially become* so *without being
> > noticed* by emacs or even the users themselves…
> > 
> > …what if one day mac os x or ubuntu or windows starts bundling a
> > version of sqlite with special “improved” extensions that are made
> > proprietary? we don’t want that.  We want emacs to break in that
> > case, and potentially the users to do something to become themselves
> > responsible of a such combination of software.
> 
> If the OS starts shipping SQLite with "improved" extensions and Emacs
> uses it, it is the same as any other OS-provided library: acceptable by
> GNU, although undesirable.
> 
> Please note how you do talk about problematic extensions but not about a
> problematic OS-provided SQLite shared library. Why are we so concerned
> with the possibility of unholy extensions and not so much with the
> possibility of an unholy SQLite binary? Because in that case the only
> choice is to not use SQLite at all? (and most other Free but not GPL
> libraries)

Indeed, and it was mentioned before, that it would make sense to check for 
the gpl-compatibility symbol inside sqlite as well, since it’s not 
copylefted.

> Seriously, let's stop making up dramas based on scenarios disconnected
> from reality. The propietary software industry does not give a rat ass
> about Emacs

it’s not paranoia about emacs; they could not dare about emacs and yet 
dare about sqlite and not about their users’ freedom; we are emacs and 
want to protect users’ freedom

> and soon it will not give a rat ass about Gcc either,
> because there are better *free* alternatives, which arose in great part
> thanks to stances like this.

gcc and emacs are free, you are talking about free but potentially non-
free alternatives, and the difference is not appealing