On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 at 03:13, Chris Punches via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Hello, > > I've been reading quietly on how the GCC SC handles this and generally > only lurk here so that I can stay informed on GCC changes. I am nobody > you would probably care about, but, maybe I will be one day. No one > ever really knows. > > I thought you'd like to know what "nobody" thinks, because, if I am > paying enough attention to know that some here are not, perhaps people > who are not "nobody" will have similar observations. > > It is not appropriate to discuss the removal of someone based on > innuendo, provenly false smearing, and other types of political > maneuvering at the behest of corporations desiring the destruction of > the very projects they are sponsoring. > > It is not appropriate to even suggest to blackmail sponsor or non- > sponsor organizations by cutting ties with them to force someone that a > couple corporates in your group don't like out of their organization. > I call on those of you who argued this to restore credibility and > integrity to this discussion. > > This kind of thinking has defaced this project. What are you thinking? > We don't care about your political views. We don't care about GCC's > participation in activism-- in fact, many would view it as a marker of > instability of the project. We care about the stable maintenance of > GCC into perpetuity. > > No one who cares about these projects wants these kinds of politics > driving such a technical and fundamental project. You have been > infected. Please restore the compasses and carry on. > > I salute you, > +1 I find some of the behaviour and and actions of developers afforded positions of authority in the project highly unprofessional, and irresponsible. I would seriously question their motives, and why they are involved in the project at all. > -C > > On Sun, 2021-04-11 at 21:03 -0400, David Edelsohn via Gcc wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 8:40 PM Ian Lance Taylor via Gcc > > <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 4:36 AM Pankaj Jangid < > > > pan...@codeisgreat.org> wrote: > > > > I think, it would be great help if someone can document what the > > > > SC > > > > does. > > > > > > I don't know whether anybody actually tried to answer this. > > > > > > The main job of the GCC steering committee is to confirm GCC > > > maintainers: the people who have the right to approve changes to > > > specific parts of GCC, and the people who have the right to make > > > changes to specific parts of GCC without requiring approval from > > > anybody else. These people are listed in the MAINTAINERS file in > > > the > > > gcc repository (currently > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob;f=MAINTAINERS;h=db25583b37b917102b001c0025d90ee0bc12800f;hb=HEAD > ), > > > from the start of the file down to the list of "Write After > > > Approval" > > > people. > > > > > > A secondary job of the GCC steering committee is to approve new > > > additions to GCC that are not under the GPL for one reason or > > > another. > > > This happens rarely. > > > > > > A tertiary job of the GCC steering committee is to decide disputes > > > between maintainers that the maintainers are unable to resolve. I > > > can't recall this ever happening. > > > > > > The GCC steering committee is in principle a place to make > > > decisions > > > that affect the entire project. There are very few such decisions. > > > One was the decision to change the implementation language of GCC > > > from > > > C to C++, a decision made in 2010. Another was the decision to > > > allow > > > GCC plugins. As a counter-example, moving GCC from Subversion to > > > git > > > was supported by the steering committee members, but there was no > > > formal decision by the steering committee to approve the move. > > > > > > More generally, the GCC steering committee has historically served > > > as > > > a point of contact between the FSF and the GCC developers. In my > > > opinion this has not amounted to much over the years that I've been > > > on > > > the committee (since 2014). > > > > Also, because the FSF considers the GCC SC the "package maintainers" > > of GCC, the Steering Committee also receives and answers questions > > and > > requests from RMS and the FSF. > > > > And, as I mentioned in another thread, I believe that the role of the > > GCC SC is to perform some of the duties of a good technical manager: > > remove real or potential roadblocks so that the developers can focus > > on being productive. > > > > Some of us have initiated other activities and alliances to support > > and promote GCC and the GNU Toolchain, although it is not an official > > responsibility of the GCC SC. > > > > Thanks, David > >
