> but FSF still owned the copyright of the codes of EGCS; so it wasn't > reuniting with FSF interfering with technical decisions.
I don't follow. There's a difference between working on code whose copyright is held by the FSF and working as part of an FSF-endorsed project. > At the time, nobody explained that the SC concluded the EGCS > experience was a failure and therefore the EGCS community > should surrender and abandon the very reasons it emerged. No, indeed the opposite occured: it was concluded that the EGCS experience was a SUCCESS and that the FSF should use that model for its future development of GCC. > It was my understanding that it was a compromise, but the > EGCS community retains all rights to make technical > decisions without disruptive interferences from FSF Your understanding is incorrect. Independence from the FSF was never an issue.
