Re: GCC association with the FSF

[Christopher Dimech <dimech@gmx.com>]

 
> Sent: Friday, April 09, 2021 at 6:37 PM
> From: "John Darrington" <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>
> To: "David Malcolm" <dmalcolm@redhat.com>
> Cc: gcc@gnu.org, "Alfred M. Szmidt" <ams@gnu.org>, "Mark Wielaard" <mark@klomp.org>
> Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF
>
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 09:35:23PM -0400, David Malcolm wrote:
>      
>      > RMS was the first person to be involved in GNU and GCC.  Others
>      > became
>      > involved later (under his leadership).  Their contribution was and
>      > continues to be welcome.  They are also free to stop contributing any
>      > time they wish to do so.
>      
>      I intend to continue contributing to GCC (and to Free Software in
>      general), but RMS is not my leader.

RMS never sent me an Allegiance Oath.
 
> Nobody is suggesting that RMS should be regarded by everyone or indeed
> anyone as "mein Führer".  I think he would be very much concerned if anyone
> tried to confer a cult hero status on him.
> 
> Sooner or later, if for no reason other than his age, RMS will have to step
> down as leader of GNU.   Rather than calling for his head on a block it
> would be more constructive to think to the future.  Unfortunately to date,
> I have not seen anyone who in my opinion would have the qualities necessary
> to take over the role.
> 
>      
>      > Then why do you write this from your employer's email?
>      
>      My employer gives me permission.
> 
> That's good to know.  My employer on the other hand expressly forbids it.
> And I think that is a reasonable prohibition (we're allowed to use their
> internet connection for personal use) but not allowed to use the company
> name (including email addresses) in personal communication.  Even if they
> didn't prohibit this, I wouldn't dream of using my company's email or
> letterhead for personal communication.
>      
>      Given the reaction that some have faced for questioning RMS, I'd prefer
>      to keep that address private.
> 
> So in other words, you are happy to make contraversial statements, but don't
> wish to face the responsibility.  Come on David!  By all means question RMS
> (or anyone else) but have the guts to do this under your own identity rather
> than duck in and out behind a veil of quasi-anonymity!

My address is public.  David, if you did not like my reaction, I would
not say that you hesitated in making disparaging comments.  But am not
against using your freedem of speech to see what is going on.

But tho philosophy that is guiding the utterances against RMS by left wing
totalitarians is the same philosophy of that of Mao Zedong - "Life is shit
and then you die!".
 
> I'm glad that you're going to continue to contribute to GCC.
> 
> J'
>