On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Joel Sherrill <joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com> wrote: > Richard Kenner wrote: >>> >>> I must admit that this interpretation is quite new to me. >>> It certainly wasn't when EGCS reunited with gcc. >>> >> >> I disagree. "reuniting with GCC" means "reuniting with the FSF". >> > > Richard's memory is correct here. We did not want > any perception of any company having undue influence. > > EGCS was an experiment in development methodologies > that was intended to open up gcc. If successful, > the goal was to move from being a fork to being > the main GCC FSF development. There was never any > intention of becoming a non-FSF fork.
I never suggested EGCS was to become non-FSF. The source code of EGCS was still owned by FSF. Rather, it is question of letting developers make technical decisions without disruptive interference from FSF. > > gcc 2.95 was where it reunited. The egcs fork > only existed from 1997 until April 1999 when 2.95 > was released. Yes. Nobody is disputing that. What disturbs me is the new interpretation of the SC mission statement. -- Gaby
