From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Contradictiory directions Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:41:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20211211035614.15517.53830@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <877dc6tjz0.fsf_-_@yahoo.com> <871r2e5g4u.fsf@telefonica.net> <4228873.32GBL0O4vs@galex-713.eu> <87fsqt4t97.fsf@telefonica.net> <87bl1h4lix.fsf@telefonica.net> <83bl1hhvjk.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="yG3lLcOgWJAUBDk7" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13763"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: =?utf-8?B?w5NzY2Fy?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 16 10:41:58 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mxnGv-0003L3-Te for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:41:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53950 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mxnGu-0001cb-CG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:41:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:50006) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mxnG6-0000v1-Vl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:41:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:35342) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mxnG5-0006Tp-AE; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 04:41:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=hkF9yhsoRg4mGBYdtI0G2NTijddLtW/jPsJhkgTDzes=; b=YBnUF5hkd2dRwBplLfMp/JHaL8 Pusu+qWqjjlBusZ3ro1f+Dek7lCujMrwVzt+wugq7UHyI4A4JKqIQuCCO30k+iCSYL/Bi2VH4FnhH cesxKGPuZXxqKp8+sssgWbLxI93i5VXCnZqeZhc5HsgU8nM7qaDxnLBK0PQvL+pYjoztGXkX7e4fX 05qJTBtbe3l0cZobLKVPWYQvqz0HXBPIaNeTbID05ciSg3vE+9UPecsotoHY9iLmA1ayv6YT3WHIN CKPAKuGT7phyyS6NdjKjbAzZzkZChsxupeA+qe8gvXUWf+6C/D/b7sZvtO76fzyOyNhPch5rYLSgx 8B0FdJ8g==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mxnG1-0007dY-Gi; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 10:41:01 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83bl1hhvjk.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:282139 Archived-At: --yG3lLcOgWJAUBDk7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 09:13:19AM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: [...] > > Since a few years ago Gcc improved after painfully breaking old > > constraints, pressured by the new competitor, but I'm afraid that it > > will be too little, too late. Linux compiles with Clang, and that's a > > very worrying signal for Gcc, because if certain distributions migrate > > to Clang, Gcc development will be over. >=20 > That rings a bell: it's what I heard 20 years ago about XEmacs vs GNU > Emacs when I talked (in person) to its main developers. The rest is > history. I think it is still relevant. Big corps have learnt to ride the waves since then. Watch Microsoft "being friendly" to "open source" to the tune of $ 7 billion (if I remember correctly) they shelled out for Github (they didn't out of the goodness and warmth of their hearts: I, at least, don't believe in fairy tales). Watch Google (before that) editing out the "do no evil" while nobody seemed to be looking. They still want some kind of user [1] control, but they know they can't be as ham-fisted as they used to be in the '8ies and '90ies. The question is wheter to agree or disagree with this "new" user control patterns. Personally I don't, but I don't yet know the FSF's position on that. Cheers [1] how is the return on investment to be secured, otherwise? --=20 t --yG3lLcOgWJAUBDk7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCYbsJrQAKCRAFyCz1etHa RlwpAJ0facQ0XuFvbuvjOk4oZL0C3PuaDgCfVIhpiVNQyq88gamze0XYHcTBlIc= =NOBs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --yG3lLcOgWJAUBDk7--