From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Geoff Keating To: rms@gnu.org Cc: guerby@acm.org, dewar@gnat.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: repository [was: Re: Why not gnat Ada in gcc?] Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:45:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <345.971320048@upchuck> <200010122240.QAA09837@wijiji.santafe.edu> X-SW-Source: 2000-10/msg00312.html Hi Richard, Richard Stallman writes: > But it is unreasonable to ask ACT to put its repository onto a machine > run by Cygnus, and associated by the public with Cygnus. If we want > to say to ACT that using the GCC repository is the only right thing to > do, we need to move the GCC repository to a neutral GNU site first. * It wasn't well publicised, but Cygnus Solutions merged with Red Hat, Inc., on July 1 of 2000. The name of the merged company is Red Hat, Inc., and so it is no longer appropriate to speak of 'Cygnus', as it no longer exists as a separate entity. * It is also not correct to say that the machine `sourceware.cygnus.com' (aka sources.redhat.com and gcc.gnu.org) is `run by Red Hat' (or Cygnus). It's currently administered by a group of people, who are all Red Hat employees, but do not generally administer it in their capacity as a Red Hat employee; as an example, the on-site administrator is neither a member of the main Red Hat I/S organization nor the Red Hat Engineering Services I/S organization, but is currently a staff engineer. Many of the other admins are doing it in their capacity as FSF project maintainers or steering committee members, which is a personal capacity not part of their employment. It (the machine and the network connection) is _funded_ by Red Hat, but this is of course not the same thing. * I question as to whether any "neutral GNU site"s exist with the capacity to provide such a service. I don't believe the FSF has the resources or competence by itself; the other obvious candidate would be sourceforge, but they are "associated by the public" with VA Linux, and according to their web site the admins' salaries are paid by VA Linux: "VA Linux Systems now pays our salary to offer you these services." * Finally, I'm not sure you're asking the right question. You said "put its repository...". I would never ask this of anyone, as I would expect that ACT has information in its repository, for instance in checkin messages, which is confidential, or private, or was not intended to be released. Instead, the request is that ACT take their current tree, as they would ship it to a nonspecific customer, and check it in, so that the only information released is that encoded in the GPLed sources. -- - Geoffrey Keating