On 22/01/20 10:58 pm, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > That is no different than a GNU maintainer buckling down on some > specific technical decision.
Except that it's not how the glibc community worked since it rebooted in 2010-2011. I don't remember an instance in the last almost decade of my involvement that a maintainer buckled down in the manner you seem to find acceptable. You can claim that the community misunderstood the GNU projects goals, etc. but that does not divert from the fact that an entire community of developers felt powerless and alienated by that one act. > The GNU project is not community run, > and it would be bad for the GNU project if it was because the > community can have very diverging opinions on software freedom. That's where the meat of the issue is for me. This is no different from a large tech company wanting to keep tight control over projects they may have spawned, sometimes at the detriment of the project, only because they don't trust the community to keep true to their goals. Siddhesh
