On Tue, 30 Mar 2021, 08:48 mfriley via Gcc, <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > For the record, I am not a GNU contributor--I am only chiming in as a > > FOSS sympathizer. I will not pretend to be unbiased, or to have any sort > > of personal experience with, or extensive knowledge of, RMS's behavior > > apropos of GCC, or any other GNU project. > > > (For the last point, I don't think the free software movement needs a > > single leader; it needs many people advocating free software, and > > discussing issues related to free software, from diverse perspectives. > > RMS's ideas that form the foundation of the free software movement are > > still of fundamental importance today. But other people can now build > > better on those ideas in today's context.) > > Perhaps it does not need a *formal* leader, but I am strongly inclined > > to believe that guidance in some form or another does matter, and I think > > a lot of RMS's supporters (vocal or otherwise) feel similarly. Some have > > claimed that RMS has only repelled people from free software, and yet, > > in spite of the threat of cancellation, many more people have signed the > > letter in support of RMS than the one demanding his removal. >
We're talking here about whether he should be on the GCC steering committee, not the FSF board. The GCC community should decide, not signatories to petitions. > "Leaderless" movements are always feckless because they lack direction. > We're not talking about a movement, were talking about the GCC project. We have leaders, and a steering committee. RMS does not contribute usefully to that steering committee. > They start with good intentions, but when anyone can find a soapbox and > > [...] > This is not directed at any reasoned criticism of RMS. I doubt that > > everyone who wants him removed is so bluntly insane. If GNU and the > > FSF see it fit, that is entirely their prerogative. But it will do > > absolutely nothing to satisfy these people, because they are acting > > in bad faith. As others have suggested, I fear that it will only make > > things worse. Totally irrelevant to his position on the GCC steering committee. If you want to discuss the broader issues, please do so elsewhere.
