> Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2021 at 4:34 AM > From: "David Brown" <david.br...@hesbynett.no> > To: "Pankaj Jangid" <pan...@codeisgreat.org>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF > > On 10/04/2021 14:58, Pankaj Jangid wrote: > > > > I have never said that the project will survive without maintainers. I > > just asked you to count me as well. Success of the project also depends > > on how widely it is used. And you need to look at the reasons why people > > are using it. > > > > I think it is useful to consider why people use gcc - I agree that > without users, there would be no project. > > So why /do/ people use it? I suspect that one of the biggest reason is > "it's the only compiler that will do the job". For a lot of important > software, such as Linux kernel, it is gcc or nothing. Another big > reason is that gcc comes with their system, which is commonly the case > for Linux systems. In the embedded development world (where I work), > the normal practice for getting a toolchain for a microcontroller is to > download an IDE and toolchain from the manufacturer - and these days it > is more often gcc than not. You use gcc because that is the standard, > not from choice. > > For those that actively /choose/ gcc, why do they do so? I'd guess > being convenient, well-known and free (as in beer) come a lot higher > than the details of the licence, or the difference between "free > software" and "open source software". (For me, a major reason is that > the same compiler supports a wide range of targets. That, and that gcc > is technically a better compiler for my needs than any alternatives.) > > I suspect that only a very small (but not zero) proportion of gcc users > care that the project is part of GNU and under the FSF. I suspect that > a larger proportion would start caring if they felt (rightly or wrongly) > that at the top of the hierarchy was a misogynist who patronises and > sexually harasses women. > > (As always, this is just my opinion.)
I use it because I can do the numerical computations for a given task. Because it is free software I can work unhindered. RMS could have been anybody with any type of personality, I would still use it. It is not about any qualms about the behaviour of the people who worked on it. I could also continue the work even after I change employment status or stop working with particular groups. But I have to say that there was tremendous progress during the first eight years of the Gnu Project, and cost practically nothing. But the advance since then has not been very great. Another problem is that there are not many people working on applications. In mathematics, for instance, I did not find people currently in the hacking community who could contribute much. Additionally, the work is too advanced even for mathematicians working at undergraduate level. Those working at graduate level customarily restrict the code, because principal investigators customarily compete with their peers by trampling on others and acting nasty. In a lot of ways, the free software community works better. Provided, people are able to keep their interactions within reason, rather than putting too many demands on each other. The original hacking spirit has been eroding through the years, particularly post-2008. People should start organising things with RMS, if they want to see how good then really are in making things better. Rather than limiting themselves with hacking, people should try to organise things together with governmental bodies in various countries. Organisers will quickly figure out the real difficulties that come up, and learn from their mistakes to do a better job. Remembering my first year, I thought I did my homework and done a great job. In the end I found out that I blew it. I was frustrated, completely frustrated. I had to correct my mistakes. The next few years, I started to introspect and emphasise in order to correct my mistakes. I am still making mistakes and it is difficult. Regards
