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

[Joe Buck]

> Making sure that participants have fun is indeed an important part of
> a successful project, but is hardly the only one.  And often that part
> conflicts with more important parts.  Consider avionics software:
> every minor change can needs hundreds of pages of documentation and
> approvals of a dozen people.  It is not at all fun, but people who do
> it get paid a lot and the software is highly reliable.

Correct.  So if gcc2 were more reliable than egcs, that would be an
argument in its favor.  Is it?

The answer, unfortunately, is that it is not.  The reason is that egcs
has not only been more successful in recruiting developers, but also
in recruiting testers and in doing tests in a consistent manner.