> I'm scared by the dangerous influence that dangeours US corporations > and a dangerous military nation with a long history of human rights > violations (see Snowden's and Assange's revelations and the ongoing > Assange's trial) HAVE over the GCC development.
I agree that that's a concern, but the point being made is that the SC is not relevant to this because they, as a practial matter, have almost no influence on GCC development. GCC development is mostly influenced by those companies that pay people to work on GCC. It is a fact that most of these are US corporations. But the only way to change that is to encourage companies that are *not* in the US to contribute too. > 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? I don't know whether that's the case or not, but I've read this entire thread and have seen no evidence either way on that issue. In any event, I suspect that the "all communications" may be less than a few dozen emails a year, although that's only a guess on my part. > Thus, I'm not naive enough to ignore the thousands way your employee > can get huge advantages by having you in the GCC's Steering Committee. Thousands? Given how little the SC actually *does*, I find it hard to come up with any meaningful advantages at all, let alone "huge" ones. > As a small example among many many others, you are using a @google.com > mail address while serving in the Steering Committee. So? How many emails per year do SC members send on behalf of the SC? As far as I see, it averages maybe two per year, all of which are announcements of new or changed maintainers of components of GCC. > On the contrary, it explains WHY you are debating against an urgent > fix to the GCC Steering Committee on my request, while you had no > problem to promptly remove Stallman on Nathan's request. Again, the position taken was that RMS was never *on* the SC to begin with. > You said you involved him in SC discussions. > You said you treated him as a member of the Steering Committee. You're missing the point here. The role of the SC is to act as the official maintainer of GCC. The official maintainer of a GNU project coordinates things with the GNU project (a tautology). RMS is indeed involved in those communications (which I suspect are quite rare), but as a representative of the GNU project, *not* of the GCC SC.
