> Then it would not longer be GCC. It would be something different. > The whole point of GCC is to provide a free software compiler for the > GNU system and systems based on GNU, and not to be pragmatic at the > cost of software freedom.
Certainly that was its initial intent, but I'd argue that at this point, the main value of GCC to the Free Software movement is that its extensive use outside of the GNU system makes people aware of the movement and of the quality of its software. > Commercial interessts are often at odds with software freedom as > well. This is one of the many reasons why the GNU project is > entierly volunteer based. Although that's true, I strongly suspect that the majority of actual work done on GCC is commercially funded. > But I'd hope that we can avoid words like "fanaticism", "childish", > "cultish" simply because of disagreement in philosophies or continuing > to spread obvious misunderstandings of what someone wrote, it is not > constructive and only causes unnsesescary agitation. Agreed!
