Re: New DFSG-compliant emacs packages

2006-10-28 Thread Daniel Schepler
n, or even chmod o-r it. Those are things any user should be able to do without thinking about it, which is why I actually voted for the option "FDL is non-DFSG in all cases" in the GR. But it seems I was in the minority among Debian developers on that one... -- Daniel Schep

Re: Bug#207932: Consequences of moving Emacs Manuals to non-free

2006-03-27 Thread Daniel Schepler
hout the manual _is_ perfectly reasonable. The inline documentation accessed by e.g. C-h f or C-h k is a different story; but since that's generated from the GPL source files (both .c and .el files), it's automatically covered by the GPL. -- Daniel Schepler

Re: Bug#193439: emacsen-common: debian-emacs-policy and package setup in conffile

2003-05-16 Thread Daniel Schepler
h-make based on this discussion, to request that its template be fixed. Hopefully this will mean that most new packages will incorporate the fix. Now to fix my tads2-mode package. Not that I think anybody other than me actually uses it... -- Daniel Schepler "Please don&#x

Re: Splitting of XEmacs21 elisp packages

2003-05-01 Thread Daniel Schepler
James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Browsing through the wishlist bugs on xemacs21-packages, I've seen >> several requests for the ability to remove parts of the XEmacs >> support code, either t

Re: Splitting of XEmacs21 elisp packages

2003-05-01 Thread Daniel Schepler
James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Daniel Schepler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I've made a first rough version of a splitting of >> xemacs21-{base,mule}support into individual packages. These packages >> are at > > Err, is this some s

Splitting of XEmacs21 elisp packages

2003-05-01 Thread Daniel Schepler
21-mail-lib, no-xemacs21 | xemacs21-fsf-compat This seems ugly, though. -- Daniel Schepler "Please don't disillusion me. I [EMAIL PROTECTED]haven't had breakfast yet." -- Orson Scott Card