Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> writes:
>> Please move such unconstructive arguments elsewhere.
>
> Wait.  Steven's comment was on the snarky side, but coming from a
> long-time gcc contributor I don't think it was over the line or even
> near it.  I think he was expressing a perfectly valid point of view
> considering the constraints that the FSF places on gcc developers.  For
> certain aspects of gcc, generating documentation from code makes all
> kinds of sense.  The fact that the FSF is preventing us from doing that
> is a real problem.  It's not a critical problem, but it's one in a line
> of real problems.

I think it'd be a lot more palatable if there were at least some
justification given for ignoring the request -- but at least the way
Mark stated it, rms was just dismissive.

-Miles

-- 
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Reply via email to