From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi1-x22c.google.com (mail-oi1-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22c]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A84B3858023 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 17:07:21 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 1A84B3858023 Received: by mail-oi1-x22c.google.com with SMTP id x207so17191410oif.1 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:07:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=L/tJLtKHu2NjUKj6P1bmHuE7DHPzSq6RiBSgjacz1d0=; b=Ywpaw1YVojoF6jyJOvFme1sYGLQ198/tbe3T5TC1OwtxSEpEagI18XY+e9+HoDI2am IA0nhOQ4tN40+GNoEnlF89rQ5mCVKieBT+5tyzkAkBJQGJPRwnI8//h03Z0yIp9FF9vg sAAR59Wqk4l5a91uJgbpQAXXpKQR1Ng6WOhaX0wePpI3RM/pDlYUey2gHqYvY8dh1ZEj h5rKQKHCcCIpFebsl3Uc7fikfoz2mrDghqN4WnR4ApWY/SS5mjzKb9OSxCbPM4KjSNXp byNA9+vP8Z0CFhHcRi2PDmX5uQN1jzGffFW+eTAlKAGhzsa6nIxcr/y0Osfx4AYegIxL Uq6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531TeJqnAZ3zdG2DEoMMOQ5idp0dUQn1lP3ARIn9oAYpaSJENmjh Tx/dyYNORniP4aYWhMJ3mGQaztpNVVsX0tiriZc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwMod07e/lLCBzCL3F70BrKqXyisuXhy4LWX+1cVjbzp21rYBoSFOrIjgf4nQpElkr6ClOrVBkD/0JQjifILrQ= X-Received: by 2002:aca:df54:: with SMTP id w81mr4126919oig.108.1617124040412; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:07:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210330151656.00007e20@tesio.it> In-Reply-To: <20210330151656.00007e20@tesio.it> From: JeanHeyd Meneide Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 13:07:07 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Remove RMS from the GCC Steering Committee To: Giacomo Tesio Cc: Nathan Sidwell , GCC Development Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 17:07:22 -0000 Dear Giacomo, I want to reply specifically to you because you, like me, are a new contributor, and I have a few questions and a few points that I think are salient in this discussion. > As an Italian I'm having a hard time trying to follow your reasoning > about Stallman being a problem to attract new talents. > > I could understand such statement if he had committed actual crimes, > was legally persecuted, processed and condemned like Reiser. > > But while I try, I cannot really understand why you think that his name > in the Steering Committee would drive away people from contributing GCC The first is that I don't want to get into the conversation about how the FSF handles Stallman. Other than them having my Copyright assignment (something I also need to take a look at), the FSF does not write the code. GCC's contributors, like you and me, do. My biggest problem with Stallman right now is not about whether or not he likes US-ians or if he's a good person: My problem is Dr. Richard M. Stallman stands credibly and factually accused of Doxxing and GCC contributor/participant and knowingly manipulating the project for his own personal reasons. When I say this, I want to be clear: when Mark sent his e-mail I followed up with multiple GCC contributors to determine how factual his claim actually was. Multiple people have independently corroborated that Stallman did what Mark said, and worse, and their quotes of Stallman's words line up word-for-word. In fact, what Stallman did was worse than what Mark described, and has happened multiple times before. Stallman is willing to attack and engage in cancel culture of his own contributors. What his reasons are, I don't know and I do not want to know: my bottom line here is that Stallman is a danger to GCC contributors and is harmful to them. I make no argument based on my ethnicity, skin color, which side of the globe I come from. Dr. Stallman's demonstrated behavior is that he can - and WILL, and HAS - shown up into places where he has very little to offer technically and utterly derailed or otherwise harmed individuals or peoples **and their code contributions**. So, it boils down to this for me: either GCC is a place where all contributions are welcome, or GCC is a place of hypocrisy, where contributions are welcome except when Stallman (or someone else in a position of power) lobbies a non-technical, non-factual argument against you and jumps from their high tower to slam down on rank-and-file contributors and participants. You cannot have it both ways. That is why I switched from "wait and see" to "absolutely not". I am not going to wait for the day somebody high up enough on the GCC ladder doesn't like me enough to decide that he's going to shoulder-slam my contributions with non-technical claptrap, nor am I going to recommend other people to this project if anyone can do that to them. Which brings me to another important point... > I do not really know if the removing Stallman from the Steering > Committee would attract more US people in GCC development. Or if it > would attract more US people that now prefer to work in LLVM only > because of they feel somehow bad working with Stallman in the SC. > > > But I can assure you that, as Pankaj Jangid said before me, many many > people are attracted to GCC, as users and developers, BECAUSE of > Stallman presence, because they know that something like this > https://medium.com/@giacomo_59737/what-i-wish-i-knew-before-contributing-to-open-source-dd63acd20696 > will not happen to them. > > > World wide, people do not LIKE Stallman, but we TRUST him on this. > Just like the GPLv3, RMS is not perfect, but it does ONE THING well. You state it here and many others say it throughout the thread that Stallman is the only reason they contribute to GCC, or similar Free Software projects. This deeply concerns me, because the underlying implication is if that Stallman were to disappear, right this second, all of you would be gone. Yet, on the other hand, we say that this is the "Free Software MOVEMENT". A movement cannot be destroyed because one person disappears; if that is the case, it is not a movement, but a ring of personality around an individual. Either this is a Free Software Movement, or this is Stallman's Free Software Shindig. I contribute to GCC because I expect that when Stallman is gone and I am Stallman's age, there will still be a Free Software Movement. Stewarded by the FSF or the CNCF or the {insert gathering of like-minded OSS contributors and enthusiasts and hard workers here}. Is this not the case for you and others? If Stallman is the only thing holding this movement together, I would like to know this now so I can invest my time in an actual movement elsewhere, independently of whether or not he remains on the Steering Committee. (I still believe he has no place to have a position of power on the Steering Committee, and instead should just be a normal contributor, like everyone else, because he has proven he is irresponsible and dangerous with such power.) Sincerely, JeanHeyd