Re: Bug#227159: ocaml: license conflict in Emacs Lisp support?
Scripsit Brian Thomas Sniffen
> Henning Makholm <email@example.com> writes:
> > An internal function call is not an API, and it is reasonable to
> > expect the law (as applied by courts with a clue, assuming that such
> > courts exist, yada yada) to treat them differently.
> OK. Are you still talking about the OCaml elisp code, or are we
> purely into the realm of theory right now?
Since I haven't seen the elisp code in question, I suppose you would
call me a theorist. I was responding to Anthony DeRobertis' claim that
the elisp code could be a derivate of Emacs solely because it was
using "copyrightable APIs".
> I'm more concerned with pushing the ocaml.el discussion to a
One step on the way to a conclusion is to figure out whether the .el
files are derived from Emacs solely by virtue of using Emacs's APIs.
Henning Makholm "Apologies if I am repeating obvious
conclusions. My only gateway onto the Net is
very expensive, and I miss many important postings...
Please write to me and tell me what you think. I don't get much mail."