"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On 23/03/07, Richard Kenner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > > In which case, the companies concerned, rather than the individuals, | > > are volunteers: they have no contractual obligation to the FSF. Marc | > > Espie's argument stands. | > | > I don't see that. They are "volunteers" in terms of what they choose to | > contribute to the FSF, but not at all such in terms of what they *work on*. | > And I thought that discussion was about the latter. | > | | I refrained from replying that because I think discussing the | semantics of the word 'volunteer' when applied to for-profit companies | or more precisely for individuals that work in for-profit companies is | way off-topic and not very helpful in order to solve the problem at | hand.
And you could have as well assumed that Marc Espie is not totally ignorant of the GCC project social aspects. [ as a matter of fact, his relaying "remor report" surrounding EGCS back in summer 1997 partly convinced me to spend resources on EGCS, then GCC. ] -- Gaby
