> Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 2:42 AM > From: "Iain Sandoe via Gcc" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> > To: "GCC Development" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> > Cc: "Thomas Koenig" <tkoe...@netcologne.de> > Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers > > Kalamatee <kalama...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 11:05, Kalamatee <kalama...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 at 10:42, Iain Sandoe via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > It is already a considerable leap for many engineers to post code for > > public > > review; it is essential (IMO) that review of code is carried out on a fair > > and > > technical basis without personal attack or harrassment (or unwelcome > > unrelated > > attention). > > > > “Grow a thicker skin” is an appalling advertising slogan. > > > > I just want to clarify - i am not posting these things to be a "troll" > > or awkward, but as someone that uses "your" toolchain, because we depend > > on it to build "our" operating system, and the actions (and inactions!) > > on this list are a bit disturbing when taken in context of the whole > > thread. > > > > I have a massive amount of respect for the people involved in developing > > gcc (which is far beyond my capabilities, of just developing patches to > > support the OS I contribute to), but I still have a vested interest in > > what happens because of the actions here - as do many corporate, > > commercial and academic institutes that invest money and time on "your" > > toolchain - so to exclude everyone except a group of people who have > > built a rapport in discussions that affect us feels a bit offensive to be > > honest. > > I am saddened by the prospect that there might be no consensus available > here. > > ---- > > This thread has become so intertwined with different discussions it seems > that people are mistaking who has said what. > > For the record (on-one needs to take my word for it, the list is archived). > > * I am not being paid to work on GCC, I have been once (some time ago now) > - however almost all my input is voluntary over the 12 years or so since I > made my first commit. > > * I have not: > > expressed any opinion re RMS > expressed any opinion re FSF or the desirability of a fork > > said that people need to agree (technically or procedurally) > required people to have rapport (I doubt that there is as much as folks > think). > > I have said: > > if people are not willing to resolve differences in a civilised manner, > that perhaps indicates that they have no interest in resolving anything. > This does not seem contrary to general GNU guidelines either: > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html
It has been occurring to me that Nathan-and-Associates do not want a fork. This has became problematic because they do not seem to be able to successfully run a Gnu Package because they would have to deal with RMS. Although I have not campaigned against their continuation as maintainers, they lobbied for my removal. And that's definitely not on! > I am not willing to spend my spare time working in a hostile environment. > > well, I did post in good faith, > Iain > >
