On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 02:18, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> What are we? Adults or Children? You know, as I know, that identities
> can be made up. There are many computing specialists who can do that.
> They can even be made so it looks as though they were sent by you, or
> from your work and hom
> On Apr 14, 2021, at 5:10 PM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> What are we? Adults or Children? You know, as I know, that identities
> can be made up. There are many computing specialists who can do that.
> They can even be made so it looks as though they were sent by you, or
> from your work and
Joseph Myers :
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2021, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> > I'm not judging RMS's behavior (or anyone else's) one way or
> > another. I am simply pointing out that there is a Schelling point in
> > possible community norms that is well expressed as "you shall judge by
> > the code alone".
Paul Koning via Gcc :
> > On Apr 14, 2021, at 4:39 PM, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc
> > wrote:
> > So we don't get the choice between "everyone is welcome" and "some
> > people are kicked off the list." We get the choice between "some
> > people decline to participate because it is unpleasant" and "
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 9:18 PM
> From: "Jonathan Wakely"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "Nathan Sidwell" , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 02:18, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > What are we? Adults or Children? You know, as I k
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 10:20 PM
> From: "Aaron Gyes"
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Cc: dim...@gmx.com
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> > On Apr 14, 2021, at 5:10 PM, Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> > What are we? Adults or Children? You know, as I know, that identities
> > can
Adrian via Gcc :
> Eric S. Raymond :
> > there is actually a value conflict between being "welcoming" in that
> sense and the actual purpose of this list, which is to ship code.
>
> Speaking as a "high functioning autist", I'm aware of the difficulties that
> some of us have with social interactio
Eric S. Raymond wrote:
Paul Koning via Gcc :
On Apr 14, 2021, at 4:39 PM, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc
wrote:
So we don't get the choice between "everyone is welcome" and "some
people are kicked off the list." We get the choice between "some
people decline to participate because it is unpleasa
> On Apr 15, 2021, at 11:17 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> ...
> responding in general to this part of the thread.
>
> * The GCC environment is not hostile, and has not been for the 15 or so
> years I’ve been part of the community.
Glad to see you feel that way; my view matches yours.
> * We wo
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:08 AM Richard Biener via Gcc wrote:
> On April 14, 2021 12:19:16 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
> >N.B. Jeff is no longer @redhat.com so I've changed the CC
> >On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 11:03, Thomas Koenig
> >wrote:
> >> - All gfortran developers move to
On 4/15/21 8:00 AM, Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
My 0.02 Euro-Cent:
There is a minor problem with contributors being overly harsh/
borderline abusive on the mailing list. In my > 15 years with
the project, I have only had that problem with one single
person, and I have resolved that by never ag
On April 15, 2021 6:02:50 PM GMT+02:00, Jason Merrill wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:08 AM Richard Biener via Gcc
> wrote:
>> On April 14, 2021 12:19:16 PM GMT+02:00, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> wrote:
>> >N.B. Jeff is no longer @redhat.com so I've changed the CC
>> >On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 11:03,
On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 09:49 -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Joseph Myers :
> > On Wed, 14 Apr 2021, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not judging RMS's behavior (or anyone else's) one way or
> > > another. I am simply pointing out that there is a Schelling point
> > > in
> > > possible communit
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 4:24 AM
> From: "Richard Biener via Gcc"
> To: "Jason Merrill"
> Cc: "Thomas Koenig" , "gcc mailing list"
>
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On April 15, 2021 6:02:50 PM GMT+02:00, Jason Merrill
> wrote:
> >On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:08 AM Richa
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:31 AM David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
>
> I still admire much of what RMS has written, and have spent much of my
> career trying to implement part of a vision inspired by him. I'm sad
> about the way things have turned out. Twitter seems to turn everything
> into a pitche
Paul Koning wrote:
On Apr 15, 2021, at 11:17 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
...
responding in general to this part of the thread.
* The GCC environment is not hostile, and has not been for the 15 or so
years I’ve been part of the community.
* We would notice if it became so, I’m not sure about the
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 5:31 AM
> From: "David Malcolm via Gcc"
> To: e...@thyrsus.com, "Joseph Myers"
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, "Nathan Sidwell"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 09:49 -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> > Joseph Myers :
> > > On Wed, 14 Apr
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 7:21 AM
> From: "Iain Sandoe"
> To: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> Paul Koning wrote:
> >> On Apr 15, 2021, at 11:17 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> >>
> >> ...
> >> responding in general to this part of the thread.
> >>
> >> * The GCC
David,
for some reason or other, I did not get your mail, so I will
just reply copying in from the archive.
First, thanks for injecting some sanity into the discussion.
I will not discuss RMS' personal shortcomings or the lack of them.
In today's toxic political climate, such allegations are of
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 12:45 PM Christopher Dimech via Gcc
wrote:
>
> Proposing the guidelines essentially means that the community accepts the fact
> that many of us are incapable of navigate everyday problems and dilemmas by
> making
> “right” decisions based on the use of good judgment and va
Christopher Dimech wrote:
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 7:21 AM
From: "Iain Sandoe"
To: "GCC Development"
Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
Paul Koning wrote:
On Apr 15, 2021, at 11:17 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
...
responding in general to this part of the thread.
* The GCC environm
What I see here in sum is another high level tightly integrated Red Hat
employee saying the gist of "I'm really not saying it out of my
employer's interest and it has nothing to do with my personal
feelings".
Every single proponent of this argument that I have seen so far is
employed by one of the
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 1:26 PM Chris Punches via Gcc wrote:
>
> Every single proponent of this argument that I have seen so far is
> employed by one of the same 5 companies and "really isn't doing it on
> behalf of my company I swear".
>
> Why is it almost exclusively that specific crowd saying i
> >> ===
> >>
> >> So .. in summary:
> >>
> >> 1/ I propose that we do have written guidelines, to which someone behaving
> >> in a
> >> non-constructive manner can be pointed.
> >>
> >> 2/ if those guidelines *are the consensus* of this group and someone is
> >> unable to
> >> follow them
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 8:51 AM
> From: "Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc"
> To: chris.punc...@silogroup.org
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 1:26 PM Chris Punches via Gcc wrote:
> >
> > Every single proponent of this argument that I
On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 16:26 -0400, Chris Punches wrote:
> What I see here in sum is another high level tightly integrated Red
> Hat
> employee saying the gist of "I'm really not saying it out of my
> employer's interest and it has nothing to do with my personal
> feelings".
I'm not sure I'm "high
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 5:04 PM Thomas Koenig via Gcc wrote:
>
> David,
>
> for some reason or other, I did not get your mail, so I will
> just reply copying in from the archive.
>
> First, thanks for injecting some sanity into the discussion.
>
> I will not discuss RMS' personal shortcomings or t
On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 21:48 +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> David,
>
> for some reason or other, I did not get your mail, so I will
> just reply copying in from the archive.
>
> First, thanks for injecting some sanity into the discussion.
Thanks Thomas
> I will not discuss RMS' personal shortcomi
On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 17:31 -0400, David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 21:48 +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
[...snip...]
> > > Perhaps a pronouncement like: "try to make everything be
> > consumable as
> > > libraries with APIs, as well as as standalone binaries" might
> > have
>
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 at 21:26, Chris Punches via Gcc wrote:
>
> What I see here in sum is another high level tightly integrated Red Hat
> employee saying the gist of "I'm really not saying it out of my
> employer's interest and it has nothing to do with my personal
> feelings".
>
> Every single pro
Snapshot gcc-8-20210415 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/8-20210415/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 8 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On 4/15/2021 2:26 PM, Chris Punches via Gcc wrote:
What I see here in sum is another high level tightly integrated Red Hat
employee saying the gist of "I'm really not saying it out of my
employer's interest and it has nothing to do with my personal
feelings".
Every single proponent of this arg
On Thu Apr 15, 2021 at 3:40 PM BST, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> I intended the weaker observation that driving away a large number of
> smart autistic assholes (and non-assholes with poor social skills)
> is not necessarily a good trade for the people the project might
> recruit by being "more welcomi
On Thu Apr 15, 2021 at 9:51 PM BST, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 1:26 PM Chris Punches via Gcc
> wrote:
> >
> > Every single proponent of this argument that I have seen so far is
> > employed by one of the same 5 companies and "really isn't doing it on
> > behalf of my
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 6:30 PM David Malcolm via Gcc wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-04-15 at 16:26 -0400, Chris Punches wrote:
> > What I see here in sum is another high level tightly integrated Red
> > Hat
> > employee saying the gist of "I'm really not saying it out of my
> > employer's interest and it
David Malcolm :
> > I will, however, point out that it is a very *different* point from
> > "RMS has iupset some people and should therefore be canceled".
>
> Eric: I don't know if you're just being glib, or you're deliberately
> trying to caricature those of us who are upset by RMS's behavior.
M
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 11:11 AM
> From: "Frosku"
> To: "Ian Lance Taylor" , chris.punc...@silogroup.org
> Cc: "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Thu Apr 15, 2021 at 9:51 PM BST, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 1:26 PM Chris Punch
On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 12:36 AM BST, Christopher Dimech wrote:
>
> The commercial use of free software is our hope, not our fear. When
> people
> at IBM began to come to free software, wanting to recommend it and use
> it,
> and maybe distribute it themselves or encourage other people to
> distribu
> On Apr 15, 2021, at 7:44 PM, Frosku wrote:
>
> On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 12:36 AM BST, Christopher Dimech wrote:
>>
>> The commercial use of free software is our hope, not our fear. When
>> people
>> at IBM began to come to free software, wanting to recommend it and use
>> it,
>> and maybe dis
Christopher Dimech via Gcc :
> The commercial use of free software is our hope, not our fear. When people
> at IBM began to come to free software, wanting to recommend it and use it,
> and maybe distribute it themselves or encourage other people to distribute
> it for them, we did not criticise th
On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 12:52 AM BST, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
> > On Apr 15, 2021, at 7:44 PM, Frosku wrote:
> >
> > On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 12:36 AM BST, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> >>
> >> The commercial use of free software is our hope, not our fear. When
> >> people
> >> at IBM began to come to
On Fri, 16 Apr 2021, Frosku wrote:
> There is a colossal difference between commercial use and commercial
> entities buying control of projects currently governed by entities
> which are answerable to the grassroots (GNU) and then toppling that
RMS's notion of GNU is as something under his person
On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 12:52 AM BST, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> Christopher Dimech via Gcc :
> > The commercial use of free software is our hope, not our fear. When people
> > at IBM began to come to free software, wanting to recommend it and use it,
> > and maybe distribute it themselves or encoura
On Fri, 16 Apr 2021, Frosku wrote:
> Right now, the ultimate oversight of GCC sits with GNU &
> FSF -- both institutions with a mandate to represent the ecosystem based
> on level of membership and time spent fighting for free software.
I think the oversight of glibc by development working throug
I fully agree with your assessment.
Have in the past organised meetings for him and never seen any bs.
Having led the discussions, RMS was always cooperative and at no point
disrupted procedure. This was 2017-2018 when I was in Barcelona coordinating
all this - leading to the CaixaForum conversat
On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 1:16 AM BST, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2021, Frosku wrote:
>
> > Right now, the ultimate oversight of GCC sits with GNU &
> > FSF -- both institutions with a mandate to represent the ecosystem based
> > on level of membership and time spent fighting for free softwa
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 11:52 AM
> From: "Eric S. Raymond"
> To: "Christopher Dimech"
> Cc: "Frosku" , "GCC Development"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> Christopher Dimech via Gcc :
> > The commercial use of free software is our hope, not our fear. When people
> > at IBM
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2021 at 12:16 PM
> From: "Joseph Myers"
> To: "Frosku"
> Cc: e...@thyrsus.com, "Christopher Dimech" , "GCC
> Development"
> Subject: Re: removing toxic emailers
>
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2021, Frosku wrote:
>
> > Right now, the ultimate oversight of GCC sits with GNU &
> >
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:29 PM Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>
> *grumble* Get *over* yourselves. You want to be "welcoming" to
> women? Don't patronize or infantilize them - respect their ability to
> tell off RMS for themselves *and then keep working with him*!
Thank you for sharing your experience
On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 3:47 AM BST, Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc wrote:
> This is about work. There are social aspects to free software, but
> it's not fundamentally a social activity. It's about getting
> something done, and for many people it's their job. For the sake of
> argument, I'm going to temp
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:02 PM Frosku wrote:
>
> > We want free software to succeed. Free software is more likely to
> > succeed if more people work on it. If you are a volunteer, as many
> > are, you can choose to spend your time on the project where you have
> > to short-stop unwelcome advances
On Fri Apr 16, 2021 at 4:19 AM BST, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:02 PM Frosku wrote:
> >
> > > We want free software to succeed. Free software is more likely to
> > > succeed if more people work on it. If you are a volunteer, as many
> > > are, you can choose to spend your t
Ian Lance Taylor :
> Patronizing or infantilizing anybody doesn't come into this at all.
I am not even *remotely* persuaded of this. This whole attitude that if
a woman is ever exposed to a man with less than perfect American
upper-middle-class manners it's a calamity requiring intervention
and m
From the discussion, it seems that there is concern about some of the
the technical directions imposed on gcc by the FSF. If we want to
resolve the current crisis without causing a fatal split within the
gcc community, we need a way at least to address those.
Therefore, a proposal for a procedur
54 matches
Mail list logo
