GCC association with the FSF

[Giacomo Tesio]

It's fantastic how inclusive you are, isn't it?  :-D

Indeed you ARE inclusive to those who share your interests, like Nathan.
Just not to everybody else.


But it's quite obvious, after you removed RMS's oversight on SC's decisions.

And now I'm depicted as a "concern troll", because I don't share your opinion.
You can't argue in merit, so you insult me personally.
I'm fine with this: it says a lot about you and nothing about me.


In fact, the mail boxes of the Steering Committee's members are stored on their corporate servers.
And among such corporations are IBM and Google.

And you pretend it's all fine.


Yet I only asked to fix the Steering Committee AFTER the only credible no-profit protecting free software (FSF) was removed.

But I'm a "concern troll", right?


I think everybody can see who is who. ;-)


Giacomo


On April 10, 2021 3:04:22 PM UTC, Thomas Rodgers <rodgert@appliantology.com> wrote:
> On 2021-04-10 05:35, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 10 Apr 2021, 12:57 Pankaj Jangid, <pankaj@codeisgreat.org> 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > Jonathan Wakely via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> > 
> > You are clueless about what the SC actually does, or the control
> they
> > have over GCC.
> > I think, it would be great help if someone can document what the SC
> > does.
> 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/steering.html
> 
> They make decisions, they don't get to insert NSA backdoors on behalf
> of
> their employers without the rest of the project being aware. The idea 
> that
> the SC members have a special ability to sneak such a change in, any 
> more
> than any contributor, is just stupid. But I don't think he's seriously
> worried about that, he's just a Concern Troll raising nonsense
> concerns 
> to
> derail any useful discussion from happening. The sooner he moves on to
> a
> new compiler he trusts, the better for everybody involved in GCC.
> 
> Him too really, it's important to have trust in your toolchain...