[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Implications of moving a project to the GNU project.
Hi list,
I am currently in the process of seriously checking out the implications
of moving an open source project (specifically, Artistic Style - a
indenter/formatter
of C, C++ and Java source code - http://www.bigfoot.com/~davidsont/astyle)
to
be a part of the GNU project.
I would really like to know if anyone on this list has been through the
experience of contributing
a program to the GNU project, and has any specific SUBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE
experiences/thoughts to help me on my way.
I have recieved info on the implication from GNU (a detailed letter from
Richard Stallman is
attached), as well as the coding standards of the GNU project.
Cheers (and thanks!)
Tal Davidson
Naharia Hospital
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
To: davidsont@bigfoot.com <davidsont@bigfoot.com>
Cc: mthunder@gnu.org <mthunder@gnu.org>
Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: [davidsont@bigfoot.com: Possibility of adding Artisitic-Style
to the GNU Project]
> Would the GNU project be interested in having Artistic-Style as a part
of
> it?
>
>Yes. It clearly must be a useful program--the users have rendered
>their verdict.
>
> What are the implications of this?
>
>I've included the overall explanation below of what it means for a
>program to be GNU software. In this case, I see a few specific
>issues.
>
>1. We believe in copyleft, and the Artistic License is not a copyleft.
> So it would be best to switch to using the GPL alone as the
> distribution terms.
>
>2. For a code-formatting program to work well with the other GNU
> software is a matter of supporting the recommended GNU formatting
> style well, and making the default (or at least, one of the
> convenient default styles, as convenient as any other style).
> How do you feel about this change (if it is a change)?
>
> Of course, supporting a wide variety of styles is a good feature.
> Does Artistic-Style already do that? If so, how does the user
> choose a style? Is it controlled by some command options, as is
> the case with Indent?
>
>3. We had an old project that was never quite finished, to produce a
> program that would look at C source and determine the style it was
> written in. The idea was to output options for Indent that would
> specify that style. The idea was to make it easy to "reformat this
> file to follow its own style more consistently," or "reformat this
> file in the style of that file." Would it make sense to finish up
> this program and make it would with Artistic-Style? Would you be
> interested in working on it?
>
>
>Here's the overall explanation:
>
>======================================================================
>Calling a program GNU software means that its developers and the GNU
>project agree that "This program is part of the GNU project, released
>under the aegis of GNU"--and say so in the program.
>
>This means we would normally put the program on ftp.gnu.org (although
>we could instead refer to the developer's choice of ftp site) and we
>would want to put pages about the program on the GNU web server.
>
>It means that the developers would agree pay some attention to making
>the program work well with the rest of the GNU system--and conversely
>that the GNU project would encourage other GNU maintainers to pay some
>attention to making their programs fit in well with it.
>
>Just what it means to make programs work well together is mainly a
>practical matter that depends on what the program does. But there are
>a few general principles. Certain parts of the GNU coding standards
>directly affect the consistency of the whole system. These include
>the standards for configuring and building a program, and the
>standards for command-line options. It is important to make all GNU
>programs follow these standards, where they are applicable.
>
>A GNU program should not recommend use of any non-free program, and it
>should not refer the user to any non-free documentation. The need for
>free documentation is now a major focus of the GNU project; to show
>that we are serious about the need for free documentation, we must not
>contradict our position by recommending use of documentation that
>isn't free.
>
>Occasionally there are issues of terminology which are important for
>the success of the GNU project as a whole. So we ask maintainers of
>GNU programs to follow them. For example, the documentation files
>and comments in the program should speak of Linux-based GNU systems or
>GNU/Linux systems, rather than calling the whole system "Linux", and
>should use the term "free software" rather than "open source".
>
>Deciding that a program is GNU software does not necessarily require
>transferring copyright to the FSF; that is a separate issue.
>