RMS removed from the GCC Steering Committee

[Richard Kenner]

> Yet enough to slow down certain developments such as Nathan's libcody
> or the plugin framework.

The SC had no role in that, as was discussed here.

> You can also put trustworthy and credible observers to protect the
> interests of the global Free Software movement.

How is an "observer" going to influence which people are willing to
spend their time developing software and how much time they're willing
spend?  As a practical matter, the direction of any Free Software project
is dictated by those who actually work on it from day to day and who pays
for their time, not by groups like the SC or the maintainers.

> > > Except that the President of FSF (and Chief GNUissance himself) was
> > > receiving copy of all the communications of the Steering Committee.
> > 
> > Do we know this as a fact?  
> 
> Ian wrote so in his response to Nathan.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-April/235269.html

That says he was "involved in SC discussions", which to me, means that
he *didn't* get a copy of all their communications.  If somebody says
they're a member of the XYZ committee and "involved Bob in our
discussions", to me, that means that Bob is *not* in the committee and
doesn't get all committee communications, but that they chose to
involve him in some of their discussions.

> The removal of Stallman revealed a huge issue in GCC.
> Maybe you can't see it. Maybe you don't want to see it.
> But it's evident to any seasoned programmer outside the US.

I just don't see it as a "removal".  RMS is still in charge of the GNU
project.  That means that he, at some level, is involved in every GNU
project, including GCC.  As a practical matter, that involvement was
very slight and still is.  I don't see any change whatsoever in the
day-to-day operations of GCC.