Why not gnat Ada in gcc?

[Richard Kenner]

    The model proposed by Robert Dewar is the right one to start with, and
    it will put the merging burden on ACT if some contributions are indeed
    made by people having write access to the GNAT sources. If this
    becomes significant, I assume the natural thing will happen (move of
    the master source to the FSF CVS repository).

I think that is indeed the issue: to what extent are there likely to
*be* significant contributions from the FSF community?

Ada is a very complex language and one which is understood to that
extent by very few people and those few people nearly all work for Ada
compiler vendors.  So I don't accept that putting GNAT sources in the
repository will magically make such expertese appear.

In any event, it will *always* be the case that merges are necessary
since ACT can't use the GCC repository copy as its main development
compiler for the same reasons that Cygnus couldn't do it for GCC.