Re: X11 Mac OS X 10.3 emacs fink: only terminal?

[Tim McNamara]

Joe Corneli <jcorneli@math.utexas.edu> writes:

>    Joe Corneli <jcorneli@math.utexas.edu> writes:
>
>    > If you don't dig it, I'm not going to get upset.  You work
>    > however you want to work, I'm not trying to stop you or insult
>    > you or convert you or tell you what works for you when I
>    > haven't really got a clue or anything of the sort.  The point I
>    > was making is that on GNU lists, it is forbidden to recommend
>    > nonfree software.
>
>    Forbidden?  I'd rather say "inappropriate".
>
> Stallman does say "please", so I guess I should have said
> "undesireable" and maybe even "disrespectful."  "Inappropriate"
> works.  And don't forget "punishable by Stallman's ire."
>
> 1993
>
>  Please don`t use GNU newsgroups to recommend proprietary software,
>  regardless of what it is for.  In particular, don`t send messages
>  to this list/group praising proprietary speech programs.  It`s bad
>  enough that some people do use them; please avoid encouraging more
>  to do so.

This is gnu.emacs.help, which is a Usenet newsgroup.  It is about
using Emacs and not about furthering RMS's issues about free software.
While I think he is fundamentally correct and thought that _Free
Software, Free Society_ is an excellent book, GNU does not own any
piece of Usenet, and voluntary or otherwise censorship is not
appropriate if RMS expects to be able to maintain his or anyone else's
freedom.  Somebody wants to make it a condition of a mailing list,
that's another issue.

> [...]
>
> 2003
>
>  A few months ago, I found out that Knoppix included some non-free
>  software, and the developer said he didn't want to change that.
>
>  If he has changed his policies in the meantime, please tell me;
>  that would be good news.  But otherwise, please do not recommend
>  the use of Knoppix on GNU mailing lists.  Please recommend only
>  entirely free software.
>
>  (I am not on the help-gnu-emacs list; someone forwarded me a couple
>  of messages on this thread.)
>
>
>    However, Carbon Emacs is just as free as X11 Emacs, and it would
>    be stupid not to be able to talk about it on this group.  This
>    does not constitute a recommendation for nonfree software in any
>    way that I can see.  Sure, Carbon itself is nonfree, but we are
>    not promoting it merely by talking about Carbon Emacs, are we?
>
> I'm not really sure.
>
> I don't think I would have had any particular objection to "If you
> only have the goal of using Emacs outside of the terminal, and you
> don't mind missing out on the programs and features that you could
> use under X11, you could just install the Carbon version."  Pretty
> different from the ringing endorsement of Carbon/Aqua that we heard.

So it's not OK to talk about using Emacs under Aqua because that's not
free software, but it's apparently OK to talk about using Emacs under
Windows.  At least you haven't jumped all over those threads with your
size twelves.  Wassup with that?

And, for that matter, what "features" and programs run under Emacs/X11
that can't be run under Emacs/Aqua?  I've used both- I use the X11
version because it has a much smaller footprint- and haven't found any
functional differences- except that the scroll wheel works under the
Aqua environment but not under X11.

And, Joe, please consider using a quote string.