GCC To No Longer Require Copyright Assignment To The Free Software Foundation

[rabcor]

You do know Stallman is back, right? Seems like the SJWs quit.

He's just back on the board of directors, he's not the president of the fsf anymore, that's some random guy Geoffrey Knauth, someone nobody's even heard of... And the SJWs didn't quit, they just demanded all the organizations they seem to have properly under their thumb to defund and cut ties with the FSF; one of these is FSF Europe... Which is kinda weird, FSF cutting off ties with the FSF, what the fuck?

So yeah, sure, he's 'back' but only in a lesser capacity, with the SJWs redoubling their efforts and doing everything in their power to cut him off, him and what remains of the original FSF.

[jamesblacklock]

Supporting free software and supporting the FSF are two very different things, fuck the FSF, it's dead to everyone with a brain in the open source community. It's been taken over by SJWs and ostracized the most vital part of it.

FSF lost it's heart when it let the SJWs in and lost it's soul when said SJWs managed to force out Richard Stallman.

The only thing left is a body. A rotting corpse of what used to be the FSF.

You do know Stallman is back, right? Seems like the SJWs quit.

[rabcor]

I have mixed feelings about GPLv3 vs GPLv2, but in general, driving away contributors who don't support the Free Software movement is a good thing IMO. Not because we don't want those people involved, but because the Free Software movement is more important.

Supporting free software and supporting the FSF are two very different things, fuck the FSF, it's dead to everyone with a brain in the open source community. It's been taken over by SJWs and ostracized the most vital part of it.

FSF lost it's heart when it let the SJWs in and lost it's soul when said SJWs managed to force out Richard Stallman.

The only thing left is a body. A rotting corpse of what used to be the FSF.

[curfew]

So, Canonical is bad because they require CLA. Qt is bad because the Qt Company requires a CLA. Meanwhile the whole Linux world has been dependent on a compiler chain that has been CLA'd since forever, and nobody bats an eye.

[reba]

Personally I use SmartGit; it's really powerful, multiplatform and free for noncommercial uses.

[uid313]

One thing I do find weird on Git is that doing --help pops up the manual page, yet a command HAS its own help (which should be displayed instead...).

As an example, doing git commit --help displays the man page, but doing git commit --kdgajda displays the help.

It is full of weirdness, like sometimes you need to add -l for list, but sometimes you don't need it, depending if you list tags, branches, remotes or whatever.

Also its difficult to use command-line tools, I wish there was some great UI. I know there is like Gitk or something, but it sucks. Gitg seemed promising. GitHub for Desktop is officially only for Windows, but its a bit available for Linux via third-party builds.

I wish someone would make Clippy for Git, something like Microsoft Clippy, a gem that pops up and say, hey, I see you are trying to commit some stuff, let me help you with that.

[tildearrow]

These Git is a beast, it is so difficult to use. Have to dig down into command line and read manual pages. I wanted to do a quick fix that takes a minute and end up taking me hours and I just give up. It would be better if the maintainers could just fix the commit message, squash and all that since he knows how to do it, and it would be better if Git was easier to use for normal people.

One thing I do find weird on Git is that doing --help pops up the manual page, yet a command HAS its own help (which should be displayed instead...).

As an example, doing git commit --help displays the man page, but doing git commit --kdgajda displays the help.

And these things aren't really difficult to do at all. And it's not the maintainers job to fix your stuff.

$ git amend <enter>

lets you change the latest commit message however you like (And also add more changes to the existing commit).

$ git reset master <enter>

resets the commit tree to branch master while leaving your changes in-tree, allowing you to re-arrange how you commit your changes, squash them where needed and so on.

$ git rebase -i master <enter>

This one is honestly a bit of a doozy to understand, but basically it lets you rearrange and flag commits so you can do amend, squash, fixup, merge, reword or anything else on a commit-by-commit basis. A full explanation of how it works is included in the editor.

True, there's also this nice website git-scm.com with a really good explanation of how it works and how to use it. Don't know why people find difficulty in using it, I guess they never read the basic concepts behind it.......

>Especially these days with the FSF coming under fire and even some talking of possible forks to the GNU Compiler Collection

What were those problems?

Richard Stallman , lol

[randomsalad]

These Git is a beast, it is so difficult to use. Have to dig down into command line and read manual pages. I wanted to do a quick fix that takes a minute and end up taking me hours and I just give up. It would be better if the maintainers could just fix the commit message, squash and all that since he knows how to do it, and it would be better if Git was easier to use for normal people.

And these things aren't really difficult to do at all. And it's not the maintainers job to fix your stuff.

$ git amend <enter>

lets you change the latest commit message however you like (And also add more changes to the existing commit).

$ git reset master <enter>

resets the commit tree to branch master while leaving your changes in-tree, allowing you to re-arrange how you commit your changes, squash them where needed and so on.

$ git rebase -i master <enter>

This one is honestly a bit of a doozy to understand, but basically it lets you rearrange and flag commits so you can do amend, squash, fixup, merge, reword or anything else on a commit-by-commit basis. A full explanation of how it works is included in the editor.