Re: [Gdbheads] Let's resolve this quickly

[Richard Stallman]

    Whats the point of Free Software if technical decisions get made behind
    closed doors? I almost find that thought insulting. (no disrespect
    intended)

The point of free software is that users have the freedom to run it,
study it, share it and change it.  That is a matter of the license
used for the package.

How the program is developed is a separate matter.  The free software
movement is not particularly concerned with that.  If one person
writes a program all by himself, and won't even listen to suggestions,
it is still legitimate to use provided the license makes it free.  We
can still recommend and use it, if that seems useful.  There is no
conflict between such a development process and the principles of free
software.

A GNU package maintainer is appointed by the GNU Project to work for
the GNU Project.  He can do the work himself, or ask others to help.
Either way, he works for the GNU project.  He does not work for the
users, or even for those who help and contribute, so he has no
obligation to discuss decisions with them.  It is often a good idea to
do so, but that is up to him to decide.

It is often useful for a maintainer to explain decisions to other
contributors, as part of a working relationship, but the maintainer
does not owe them an explanation to their satisfaction.  Even when
he feels it would be useful to explain, he may have no time.

The GDB maintainer is a group rather than one person, but that doesn't
alter the situation.  At present, most of the group members are not
active developers, but nothing says they couldn't be.

I will encourage the committee not to feel obligated to publish its
deliberations or votes, so they can more easily reach decisions.
After reaching a decision, they can choose to publish a statement of
explanation when they think it will be helpful to do so.



that people outside the committee cannot put pressure on its members.

If this bothers you, you don't have to