> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2021 at 2:03 AM > From: "David Brown" <da...@westcontrol.com> > To: "Alfred M. Szmidt" <a...@gnu.org>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: Re: GCC association with the FSF > > On 11/04/2021 15:39, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > > It should remain an acronym, but it should now stand for "GCC Compiler > > Collection". That allows the project to be disassociated from the GNU > > name while still subtly acknowledging its heritage. > > > > Then it would not longer be GCC. It would be something different. > > The whole point of GCC is to provide a free software compiler for the > > GNU system and systems based on GNU, and not to be pragmatic at the > > cost of software freedom. Commercial interessts are often at odds > > with software freedom as well. This is one of the many reasons why > > the GNU project is entierly volunteer based. > > > > It is decades since gcc has been /just/ a free compiler for the GNU > system. That is still an important role, of course, but the compiler's > use has vastly outgrown that area. The same applies to most of the GNU > projects. > > And while I agree that commercial interests are /sometimes/ at odds with > free software, they are also essential for it - GNU would never have > existed without commercial software, and most or all of its projects > would have languished without commercial interest.
Commercial interests are not at odds, provided some rules are followed > (Look, for example, > at the Hurd project - it is absolutely critical to the concept of having > a complete software system using only free software, but it is of almost > no commercial interest to anyone. And thus it has had negligible > progress.) > > Like it or not, money is essential to the way the world works, and > commercial interests are unavoidable. You can make them work for you > while keeping the values and ideals you hold dear (such as by having > volunteers for development, with contributions and leadership > appointments being personal, while letting a commercial organisation pay > your wages). Commercial interests are generally only a problem if you > let them be a problem. As aspirations grow, money is an enabling process. A tool created to simplify transactions. And things are evolving so that transactions become digital, where money in the traditional sense does not exist. The problem is when money becomes a goal by itself. To be successful, we need the cooperation of many forces present in our surroundings, including our employers or people who do business with us. > > But I'd hope that we can avoid words like "fanaticism", "childish", > > "cultish" simply because of disagreement in philosophies or continuing > > to spread obvious misunderstandings of what someone wrote, it is not > > constructive and only causes unnsesescary agitation.
