Re: M-x send-emacs-patch

[Clément Pit--Claudel]

On 2016-05-06 15:18, Richard Stallman wrote:
> [[[ 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'm not sure. The language there is in terms of whole programs, not
>   > patches, so it doesn't apply here without some interpretation.
> 
> That is correct.

Reading this again, I find the interpretation straightforward, actually. Here's 
the whole passage:

    > This means that if you want to contribute software to GNU, you have to
    > do something to give us legal permission to use it.  There are three
    > ways this can be done:
    >
    > * Assign the copyright to the Free Software Foundation.
    > This allows the FSF to act to stop violations of the GPL.
    >
    > * Keep the copyright and release the program yourself under the GNU
    > GPL.  (This alternative is too impractical for contributions to a
    > preexisting FSF-copyrighted GNU program.)
    >
    > * Put the code in the public domain.  Then there is nothing to stop
    > hoarding of modified versions, but we can still use the program in GNU.

The second point explicitly mentions contributions to preexisting programs.  But
in any case, I think we're waiting for a confirmation or rebuttal from actual
members of the Emacs project here: will the Emacs project accept non-crucial 
patches
placed in the public domain, without paperwork? To me, the following passage
suggests that it should; however, it would be nice to have confirmation:

    > If you put the program in the public domain, we prefer to have a signed
    > piece of paper--a disclaimer of rights--from you confirming this.  If the
    > program is not very important, we can do without one; the worst that could
    > happen is that we might some day be forced to stop using it.

Cheers,
Clément.

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature