Re: [OT] Re: configure script

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>]

On 13 Jun 2002, David Kastrup wrote:

> eliz@is.elta.co.il (Eli Zaretskii) writes:
> 
> > On 12 Jun 2002, David Kastrup wrote:
> > 
> > > The people involved in the GNU project don't get a say about this.
> > 
> > And your opinions--are they based on some poll of the GNU contributors 
> > and maintainers?  Or are they just _your_ personal views?
> 
> My opinions are my own.

Then all we have is a "he said, she said" argument.  Richard has his 
views, you have yours.  For all I know, most or all GNU maintainers could 
support Richard, not you.

> I suggested to Stallman that he might come up with
> a definition about who could be considered part of the GNU project,
> so that it would be possible to do such a poll and thus clear up the
> authority with which and for whom he was speaking.
> 
> His answer was that nobody has a say in this rather than he as the
> person that put up the GNU project, so such a poll would be pointless.

If you really cared, you could start a poll yourself.

> Stallman is, of course, entitled to his personal views, but I
> would prefer if he labelled them as such.

Richard is the leader of the GNU project, to say nothing of his personal 
contributions.  He is also the president of the FSF, which works on the 
GNU project.  If anyone is entitled to speak on behalf of GNU, Richard is.

That doesn't necessarily mean you and I should agree with everything 
Richard says (you and others know how many times I disagreed with him on 
various issues), but swerving the argument to discussing whether he can 
or cannot say ``we'' is IMHO a waste of time.  Likewise the accusations 
in hypocrisy: they are not useful in practical terms and terribly wrong 
factually.