From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24097 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2018 14:53:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gnutools-advocacy-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: gnutools-advocacy-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24082 invoked by uid 89); 6 Oct 2018 14:53:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.100.1 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=stating, objection, collaborate, five X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: linux-libre.fsfla.org From: Alexandre Oliva To: David Edelsohn Cc: "Carlos O'Donell" , gnutools-advocacy@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: GNU Toolchain web site mock-up Organization: Free thinker, not speaking for FSF Latin America References: Errors-To: aoliva@lxoliva.fsfla.org Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2018 00:00:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (David Edelsohn's message of "Sat, 6 Oct 2018 10:32:43 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 X-SW-Source: 2018-q4/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 On Oct 6, 2018, David Edelsohn wrote: > We can use Google Docs to create a shared plan. We also can use > Github issues for feedback and items. Thanks for stating a separate thread for the discussion about the design. I'm afraid I have to ask who's this 'We' you write about. I've asked nicely, five times already, for us (myself included) not to use these SaaSS sites that push proprietary software onto users, because the GNU project and myself won't use them. Instead of admitting that the conversation in the other thread was indeed about what tools to use, this is how you respond, blatantly excluding me and others loyal to the GNU values, or pretending there's no objection to that selection for us all to use to collaborate? It suggests you're unilaterally closing the discussion about the tools, despite the disagreement. That's not nice at all! It's not just rude, arrogant, offensive and harmful to GNU. It's also insulting and unwelcoming. Please reconsider, or clarify. Thanks, -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo Be the change, be Free! FSF Latin America board member GNU Toolchain Engineer Free Software Evangelist