Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> writes: >> Please move such unconstructive arguments elsewhere. > > Wait. Steven's comment was on the snarky side, but coming from a > long-time gcc contributor I don't think it was over the line or even > near it. I think he was expressing a perfectly valid point of view > considering the constraints that the FSF places on gcc developers. For > certain aspects of gcc, generating documentation from code makes all > kinds of sense. The fact that the FSF is preventing us from doing that > is a real problem. It's not a critical problem, but it's one in a line > of real problems.
I think it'd be a lot more palatable if there were at least some justification given for ignoring the request -- but at least the way Mark stated it, rms was just dismissive. -Miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.