[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] details, details
From: |
Thomas Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] details, details |
Date: |
Wed, 07 Sep 2005 09:04:29 -0700 |
On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 17:38 +0200, Karel Gardas wrote:
> That's interesting information. But let say I also do have some experience
> with egcs/gcc these days at least from C++ user point of view and I can
> only add that I was happy like a small child trying egcs1.0.1 since it
> provided me with the C++ compiler which consumed _only_ about 30-40MB of
> RAM for compiling our project in comparison with gcc of these days which
> spent twice this amount. Note: 32MB RAM was quite a lot in 1996/7.
>
> So thanks to egcs hackers I've been able to complete my school projects
> with much less pain.
>
> Also the second note: current GCC release manager is doing good job IMHO
> provided as a commercial service by his small company to the big IT
> sponsor. I think this is also needed to note since every coin has two
> sides...
>
Without contradicting myself, I second you on both points and will
add a third element of praise.
The current GCC project is arguably the most professionally run example
of a public free software project there is. I don't mean that as
faint praise, even though the bar of comparison to other projects is
pretty low -- their bar is very high.
The current GCC project is very respectful of the volunteer community --
mostly by greeting eager-beaver newbies with a kind of benign neglect
while being open and helpful to clearly competent and self-interested
contributors. Day to day, it is largely an inter-corporate effort with
a few academics in the mix: good job.
I've praised them in those ways in the past and stand by that praise.
Could we have and should we have wound up with a more facile collection
of free software compiler technology? I believe so.
Was it necessary to run roughshod over the GNU project? I believe not.
Was a pattern demonstrated, and now repeated, for how to take over
projects and communities? Certainly so.
Is GCC in a bit of a tough spot because of its intractability relative
to the demands of the day? You betcha. And I say that that's a
foreseeable consequence of the dog-pile approach that forced the initial
split and takeover.
Does "every coin have two sides"? I'm not seeing any upside to the
trashing of the Arch project.
-t
- [Gnu-arch-users] details, details, Thomas Lord, 2005/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] details, details, Karel Gardas, 2005/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] details, details,
Thomas Lord <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Lalo Martins, 2005/09/07
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Andrew Suffield, 2005/09/08
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Lalo Martins, 2005/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, James Blackwell, 2005/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Robert Collins, 2005/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Robert Collins, 2005/09/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Nikolai Weibull, 2005/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Aaron Bentley, 2005/09/08
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Nikolai Weibull, 2005/09/08
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: details, details, Matthieu Moy, 2005/09/08