Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!jag
From: jag@sun.uucp (James Gosling)
Newsgroups: net.emacs
Subject: Re: Permission
Message-ID: <2334@sun.uucp>
Date: Fri, 21-Jun-85 22:04:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2334
Posted: Fri Jun 21 22:04:50 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Jun-85 07:35:05 EDT
References: <4486@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Reply-To: jag@sun.UUCP (James Gosling)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 25

I've tried to stay out of this discussion, but it has gotten too far
out of hand for me to remain silent.  In no way did I ever give Fen
Lebalm (and by dubious transitivity, Richard Stallman) permission to
distribute any part of the Emacs that I wrote.  Version 85 was not in
the public domain - I was very careful to get everyone who recieved a
copy to agree to not redistribute it.  Unfortunatly, two moves have
left my records in a shambles.

I am not against public domain software: I am very much in favor of
it.  There is an awful lot of public domain software floating around on
the net that was written by me.  Emacs is not a part of it.

I would applaud the GNU effort (Emacs has needed a real lisp in it for
a long time) if it hadn't started off with what is at best a dreadful
misunderstanding.

Properly maintaining a piece of software like Emacs over a long period
is hard to do on a volunteer basis.  I did it with my version for three
years and nearly destroyed my chances to graduate.  I spent a long time
trying to find a new maintainer (either commercial or public domain).
I found no one willing to maintain it in the public domain and provide
the quality and the commitment that I thought was necessary.  I talked
with quite a few companies, and by far the best was Unipress.  They may
prostitute their souls for a dollar, but they do a pretty good job of
looking after Emacs.