This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal
- From: "D. Starner" <shalesller at writeme dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 21:19:10 -0800
- Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal
> But that is not the FreeDOM that the FSF is taking about.
If you want to quote verse, try:
Software developers typically consider these questions on
the assumption that the criterion for the answer is to
maximize developers' profits. The political power of
business has led to the government adoption of both this
criterion and the answer proposed by the developers: that
the program has an owner, typically a corporation
associated with its development.
I would like to consider the same question using a
different criterion: the prosperity and freedom of the
public in general.
What maximizes the prosperity and freedom of the public in
general: a compiler (and hence all the Free operating systems
that depend on it) requiring continous upgrades if they want
to be able to use the source (the point of Free software), or
a compiler and Free operating system that can be compiled and
used on their current computer? Is RMS's public only that
subset of the public that can afford to spend $400 on a
computer every year?
In any case, my message wasn't about the philosophy of Free
software. It was about the pragmatic needs of many of the
users of Free software, and in my case the pragmatic needs
of a Debian developer.
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm