Re: clang and FSF's strategy

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> esr@thyrsus.com (Eric S. Raymond) writes:
>
>> David Kastrup's recent question on emacs-devel motivates me to bring
>> up a larger related question I've been meaning to open for a while:
>> Are the FSF's goals best served by continuing to technically restrict
>> GCC?

>> This is a question in which I have some positive stake.  Yes, I
>> continue to be opposed to the FSF's style of propaganda exactly
>> because I think it hinders an end goal - a software ecosystem that is
>> open-source and user-controlled - that I agree with and have worked
>> hard to achieve.
>
> You are crossposting to two public project lists of the GNU project
> with inflammatory language and mischaracterizations.  You have been
> involved with the GNU project long enough to be well aware that this
> kind of crowbar approach does not lead to much more than headlines
> about Free Software infighting.

And just for the record, here are some of the headlines.

<URL:http://lwn.net/Articles/582242/>

I'm keeping the crosspost since the main issue started up on
emacs-devel, and it mostly pertains to gcc-devel where some participants
may be interested in using the opportunity to correct misconceptions in
the discussion following the article (which could have been a lot worse
I guess).

With regard to the discussion on the mailing lists itself, I think that
pretty much everything that's relevant to the big rhetorics has been
said already.  That does not mean that nothing remains to be done in the
area of better integrating Emacs and GCC, but it does not appear like
the main obstacles are of the kind that can be overcome by
swashbuckling.

-- 
David Kastrup