From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b5a423f2d50e9a6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dvdeug@x8b4e516e.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner)
Subject: Re: Where is the Ada for LINUX Team site?
Date: 2000/11/20
Message-ID: <8va5t6$aai2@news.cis.okstate.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 697421113
References: <8v9klo$rgl$1@neptunium.btinternet.com>
 <8v9vgk$v8j$06$1@news.t-online.com> <8va26k$bqb$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Supersedes: <8va58m$aai1@news.cis.okstate.edu>
Organization: Oklahoma State University
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.3 (Linux)
Reply-To: dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-11-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 02:27:36 GMT, Robert Dewar wrote:
>In article <8v9vgk$v8j$06$1@news.t-online.com>,
>  "Juergen Pfeifer" <juergen.pfeifer@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> All these discussions have been done behind my back
>> without involving me. There seems to be an ongoing discussion
>> of GNAT packaging issues where ALT is not involved
>
>These discussions were on the main gnu mailing list, open to
>participation by any interested parties (this is a very large
>list, with lots of people being involved), "behind my back"
>is a bit of an odd description of discussions happening on
>the GNU list, given you decided not to participate in this
>list, which is the main place that issues of this kind are
>discussed.

This discussion was done on gcc@gcc.gnu.org, a public mailing list 
with a public archive at gcc.gnu.org. Most of the converstation was 
explaining to Richard Stallman how GNAT was packaged and why, during 
which RMS argued (from a philosphical/politcal standpoint) that GNAT
should be better integrated into the GNU system and not need ALT to 
package it for GNU. 

As a disintrested bystander, I found the whole converstation irrelevant.
RMS was not familar with the Ada for Linux Team, nor was he really familar 
with GNAT. Robert Dewar, the main person in the discussion who was familar
with ALT and capable of changing something, expressed no desire to do so
(beyond the long standing goal of getting GNAT in GCC 3.0, of course*).

In any case, whether or not ALT's package of GNAT is needed, ALT has
done a lot of helpful work on other Ada packages that were not even
vaguely discussed, and is still useful and will still be useful if
someone else (the distributers, hopefully) take over the building
of GNAT rpms.

[Is it just me, or does anyone else find it amusing that this thread,
in a newsgroup so senstive over Ada in all caps, has a subject
referering to LINUX instead of Linux?]

* I know this is an oversimplification, okay? I think most of the
relevant people understand what I mean, and anyone who wants to know
the whole details of GNAT and GCC 3.0 are welcome to look at the
recent (last couple months) archives of gcc@gcc.gnu.org at 
http://gcc.gnu.org

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
http://dvdeug.dhis.org
As centuries of pulp novels and late-night Christian broadcasting have taught 
us, anything we don't understand can be used for the purposes of Evil.
	-- Kenneth Hite, Suppressed Transmissions