NO RMS in GCC.

[unlvsur unlvsur via Gcc]

NO RMS.
NO RMS.
NO RMS.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

FW: Payment Transfer Receipt

[gcc via Gcc]

--
thanks

Proof of payment.html
Description: Binary data

Re: removing toxic emailers

[Thomas Rodgers]

On 2021-04-18 23:29, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:


On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, 02:41 Frosku, wrote:

On Sun Apr 18, 2021 at 9:22 PM BST, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote: 
That's why it's best to dissent politely, lest they incorrectly 
conclude

their opinions are consensual, or majoritary, just because they've
driven dissenters into silence.
The problem is, Alex, that the trolls mostly haven't been on the 
dissenting
side. All of the childish namecalling -- "jerks", "trolls", "crazies" 
--
and the insinuations that our voices aren't worth listening to because 
we
don't get paid $250,000 a year by Google to contribute to GCC all day 
are

coming from the pro-forking side.


Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day. You know nothing 
about

GCC or the "problems" you're complaining about. Your input to this
conversation is not constructive.

Once upon a time, free software developers understood that users' 
opinions

were as valid as contributor's opinions.


That depends on the user.

Once upon a time, free software's developers *were* it's primary users, 
i.e. they built the technology for themselves and made it freely 
available in the hope that it would be useful to others. It's also the 
case that the vast majority of GCC *current* users are not here making 
proclamations about what GCC's project governance should be. Rather it's 
a vocal and vanishingly small minority, who have contributed nothing of 
value, code or insights, and continue to vocally do so. Many of GCC's 
users are, however, watching in horror at the absolutely amateurish way 
in which this is playing out and wondering if their long term commitment 
should be to using this piece of software to build their 
products/businesses.

Re: removing toxic emailers

[Christopher Dimech via Gcc]

> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 3:06 AM
> From: "Thomas Rodgers" 
> To: "Jonathan Wakely" 
> Cc: "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc" 
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On 2021-04-18 23:29, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, 02:41 Frosku, wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun Apr 18, 2021 at 9:22 PM BST, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc wrote: 
> > That's why it's best to dissent politely, lest they incorrectly 
> > conclude
> > their opinions are consensual, or majoritary, just because they've
> > driven dissenters into silence.
> > The problem is, Alex, that the trolls mostly haven't been on the 
> > dissenting
> > side. All of the childish namecalling -- "jerks", "trolls", "crazies" 
> > --
> > and the insinuations that our voices aren't worth listening to because 
> > we
> > don't get paid $250,000 a year by Google to contribute to GCC all day 
> > are
> > coming from the pro-forking side.
> 
> Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day. You know nothing 
> about
> GCC or the "problems" you're complaining about. Your input to this
> conversation is not constructive.
> 
> > Once upon a time, free software developers understood that users' 
> > opinions
> > were as valid as contributor's opinions.
> 
> That depends on the user.
> 
> Once upon a time, free software's developers *were* it's primary users, 
> i.e. they built the technology for themselves and made it freely 
> available in the hope that it would be useful to others. It's also the 
> case that the vast majority of GCC *current* users are not here making 
> proclamations about what GCC's project governance should be. Rather it's 
> a vocal and vanishingly small minority, who have contributed nothing of 
> value, code or insights, and continue to vocally do so. Many of GCC's 
> users are, however, watching in horror at the absolutely amateurish way 
> in which this is playing out and wondering if their long term commitment 
> should be to using this piece of software to build their 
> products/businesses.

Completely false.  Free software's developers were people who were disgusted
with the communities of software developers that started restricting users.
The Free Software Community wanted software that they could use and modify
code for any purpose, notwithstanding any prohibition other developers 
wanted to impose on them.

The hackers of the 70s and 80s who transformed computing and the early 
internet were known for their wit.  This included using a playboy photo
of Lena Söderberg for image processing.  They had got tired of the 
usually dull test images used at conferences.  She rapidly became 
the First Lady of Computing.  Many were very happy to meet her in person
and ask her an autograph.  n 1997, Forsén worked for a government agency
supervising  disabled employees who archived data using computers and
scanners.  In 2015, she was guest of honor at the banquet of IEEE, 
delivering a speech, and chairing the best paper award ceremony.

Those were exciting times, but by now government-sepported and
corporation-supported organizations have caught up; what was once
a liberating technology has become a conduit for surveillance and
manipulation.  

Even a chimp can write code.  So I give the reply attributed to 
Eric Raymond, after Microsoft offerred him a job.

I'd thank you for your offer of employment at Microsoft, except
that it indicates that either you or your research team (or both)
couldn't get a clue if it were pounded into you with baseball bats.
What were you going to do with the rest of your afternoon, offer jobs
to Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds?  Or were you going to stick to
something easier, like talking Pope Benedict into presiding at a
Satanist orgy? - Eric Raymond

There was a time when I felt too much at odds with Eric, but today
he has became a friend.

Re: removing toxic emailers

[Frosku]

On Mon Apr 19, 2021 at 4:06 PM BST, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
> Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day. You know nothing
> about
> GCC or the "problems" you're complaining about. Your input to this
> conversation is not constructive.

This feels like that moment in 8Mile, "pay attention, you're saying the
same shit that he said." The personal insults and technical semantic
arguments are testament to the fact that you're not willing or not able
to argue the points. It's quite incredible that two people have replied
to the same multiple-hundred word e-mail about a broad issue of trying
to gatekeep discussion and both have focused on semantics ("it's not
*all* day"). I will remember not to use hyperbole in future for fear of
it being taken literally and used as an excuse to dodge the point.

> > Once upon a time, free software developers understood that users'
> > opinions
> > were as valid as contributor's opinions.
>
> That depends on the user.
>
> Once upon a time, free software's developers *were* it's primary users,
> i.e. they built the technology for themselves and made it freely
> available in the hope that it would be useful to others. It's also the
> case that the vast majority of GCC *current* users are not here making
> proclamations about what GCC's project governance should be. Rather it's
> a vocal and vanishingly small minority, who have contributed nothing of
> value, code or insights, and continue to vocally do so. Many of GCC's
> users are, however, watching in horror at the absolutely amateurish way
> in which this is playing out and wondering if their long term commitment
> should be to using this piece of software to build their
> products/businesses.

It's obvious that the majority of current users aren't here, the majority of
current users don't use the mailing lists. What have you done to try to
consult their opinions on the matter? It's amazing how much effort is being
expended to silence opposition, whilst not even one argument has been made
as to how breaking from FSF/GNU will result in a better technical outcome.

>>= %frosku = { os => 'gnu+linux', editor => 'emacs', coffee => 1 } =<<

Re: removing toxic emailers

[Christopher Dimech via Gcc]

> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 3:47 PM
> From: "Frosku" 
> To: "Thomas Rodgers" , "Jonathan Wakely" 
> 
> Cc: "Jonathan Wakely via Gcc" 
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Mon Apr 19, 2021 at 4:06 PM BST, Thomas Rodgers wrote:
> > Google doesn't pay anybody to work on GCC all day. You know nothing
> > about
> > GCC or the "problems" you're complaining about. Your input to this
> > conversation is not constructive.
>
> This feels like that moment in 8Mile, "pay attention, you're saying the
> same shit that he said." The personal insults and technical semantic
> arguments are testament to the fact that you're not willing or not able
> to argue the points. It's quite incredible that two people have replied
> to the same multiple-hundred word e-mail about a broad issue of trying
> to gatekeep discussion and both have focused on semantics ("it's not
> *all* day"). I will remember not to use hyperbole in future for fear of
> it being taken literally and used as an excuse to dodge the point.
>
> > > Once upon a time, free software developers understood that users'
> > > opinions
> > > were as valid as contributor's opinions.
> >
> > That depends on the user.
> >
> > Once upon a time, free software's developers *were* it's primary users,
> > i.e. they built the technology for themselves and made it freely
> > available in the hope that it would be useful to others. It's also the
> > case that the vast majority of GCC *current* users are not here making
> > proclamations about what GCC's project governance should be. Rather it's
> > a vocal and vanishingly small minority, who have contributed nothing of
> > value, code or insights, and continue to vocally do so. Many of GCC's
> > users are, however, watching in horror at the absolutely amateurish way
> > in which this is playing out and wondering if their long term commitment
> > should be to using this piece of software to build their
> > products/businesses.
>
> It's obvious that the majority of current users aren't here, the majority of
> current users don't use the mailing lists. What have you done to try to
> consult their opinions on the matter? It's amazing how much effort is being
> expended to silence opposition, whilst not even one argument has been made
> as to how breaking from FSF/GNU will result in a better technical outcome.

Is that right!!!  Users want to build their products and businesses?
Sounds very corporate to me, with wording that suggests the provision
of resources working on other projects for personal profit.  The users
watching in horror are most likely developers who see Richard Stallman
as an obstacle.

GCC can never break from Gnu.  They can only break from gnu, clone gcc and call
it something else such as gcc-fuckup, gcc-screw and the like.  Then, if they
manage to fuckup the licensing or the compatibility with Gcc, we shall wait for
a new generation of forward thinking hackers to join us.  The success of Gcc was
achieved to large extent due to the personal efforts of Rms.

These people never learned from the Cygnus EGCS Saga, because they cannot get
beyond the short-sighted viewpoint of "always disobey every authority".
The U.S.S. Cygnus was a "Death Ship".  Reinhardt had planned to fly her
through the black hole but suffered sever damage and was torn apart.

> >>= %frosku = { os => 'gnu+linux', editor => 'emacs', coffee => 1 } =<<
>

On US corporate influence over Free Software and the GCC Steering Committee

[Giacomo Tesio]

Hi GCC developers,

just to further clarify why I think the current Steering Committee is highly 
problematic,
I'd like you to give a look at this commit
message over Linux MAINTAINERS

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/?id=4acd47644ef1e1c8f8f5bc40b7cf1c5b9bcbbc4e

Here the relevant excerpt (but please go chech the quotation):

"As an IBM employee, you are not allowed to use your gmail account to work in 
any way 
on VNIC. You are not allowed to use your personal email account as a "hobby". 
You 
are an IBM employee 100% of the time. 
Please remove yourself completely from the maintainers file. I grant you a 1 
time 
exception on contributions to VNIC to make this change." 


This is happened yesterday (literally).

And while this is IBM, the other US corporations with affiliations in
the Steering Committee are no better: 
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-April/235777.html

I can understand that some of you consider working for such corporations "a 
joy".
But for the rest of us, and to most people outside the US, their influence
over the leadership of GCC is a threat.
Please, do not create a hostile environment for indipendent contributors.

Please... please...
Fix the GCC Steering Committee.


Giacomo