Re: clang/emacs/ecb/semantic

[Richard Stallman]

    I can't see a significant difference between:

    - the features of LLVM which could be used by a programmer to write
      a closed source IDE, that would deprieve its users of some freedom,
      and

    - the use of emacs as an editor to write a diktat depriving some
      population of its freedom.

I see the difference.  I won't try to make you see it.

(For anyone seriously interested in the issue of freedom to run a
program, I refer you to the article
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/programs-must-not-limit-freedom.html.
'Nuff said.)

    If we must consider the (possible) ultimate goals of (some of) the users
    of our software, should we continue letting them have those freedoms?
    Wouldn't it be better to keep our software secret?

That's a straw man argument.  It consists of distorting and
exaggerating what I said, producing something invalid that has nothing
to do with the issue.

I'm willing to explain GNU Project policies on this list, and show and
why they lead to the decisions I have made, but arguing against them
is misuse of the list.  If you want to argue against our position, we
have a list for such discussions: address@hidden  Please
take it there.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org  www.gnu.org
Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software.
  Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call