> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 at 8:04 AM > From: "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> > To: "Alexandre Oliva" <ol...@gnu.org> > Cc: g...@gnu.org > Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF > > On Sun, 11 Apr 2021, 19:28 Alexandre Oliva, <ol...@gnu.org> wrote: > > > Jonathan, > > > > It's very offensive for you to misattribute a disagreeing position as > > veneration. > > > > There have been many posts over the past two weeks suggesting that without > RMS to guide us, GCC will become a pawn of the NSA, or that nobody has any > authority to decide on the future of GNU projects except RMS (a view also > stated on GNU mailing lists by moderators of those very lists), or other > silly claims that are based on little but veneration. They're not really > based on anything about GCC, just "y u no like RMS?"
I have disagreed that GCC will become a pawn of the NSA, or that the only person to decide is RMS. > > I could name many reasons for me to disagree with yours, including > > justice, truth, honesty, tolerance, freedom of speech and unity of the > > movement. > > > > If anything, it's threatening to abandon a project over false > > allegations about a person, on occasion of that person rejoining the > > board of an organization that was founded and has always supported the > > project who's still led by that person, that makes the issue personal > > and based on blind faith, though in the opposite sense of veneration. > > > > Oh I have other reasons to consider the FSF a dead end too. > > > > If you find any offense in the previous paragraph, you understand > > exactly why I feel offended by your retort, so please try to take that > > into account in your attempts to participate in a kind debate. > > > > Kind debate. Right. > > Maybe somebody from the GNU project or the FSF could tell one of their GNU > Maintainers (apparently part of the governance structure of the GNU > project) to stop calling people mad, or rats, or to stop endless off-topic > trolling about communism. There is no kind debate when every other post is > an attack from a troll. Things can be said directly as customary. You are certainly willing offending me in your pursuit. There have been instances where my post followed a number of posts, but not on the entire thread. > Your own emails are always carefully considered (and carefully skate around > the actual issues people raised) but most of the other voices objecting to > the requests to make changes to GCC are coming from outsiders who are only > too happy to insult GCC devs and derail any "debate". I am not an outsider. Or have a plan to derail any debate or insult every developer. But the debate is in the gcc mailing list to which I was not an outsider. Changes can be done, and even if I would not agree with some aspects, will respect the final choice. There is no prerogative to praise developers, including myself.
