GCC2 merging (was "native language support now available")

[Richard Stallman]

    > We also would like these companies and
    > others to get the benefits of work in EGCS that's ready for production use.

    Perhaps it's time to drop the "experimental", which was only
    ever really a polite fiction.

When Gumby told me about his intention to start another branch in GCC
development.  I objected that it was likely to result in a permanent
fork.  He made a promise to the GNU project that he would prevent
this, by designating the new branch for experimental use only.  The
word "experimental" was put in the name in order to inform the public
of this.

As a factual matter, this promise has not been kept.

You're saying that this promise was a deliberate lie from the
beginning.  I don't know if you're right, but I see you enjoy thinking
so.

Do you really have so little respect for the GNU project that you
smile at the idea of making a dishonest promise to it?