[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Using Debian funds to support a gcc development task




> On Sep 28, 2019, at 6:19 PM, Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@err.no> wrote:
>> 
>> No, it just means that the current gcc maintainer [1] for m68k backend hasn't
>> worked on this particular task yet because his employer wouldn't pay for
>> this particular work. Unlike the other ports like amd64, ppc64el, arm*
>> and s390x, we don't have large companies supporting us as the commercial
>> potential is low although there is still a small Amiga, Atari and Mac68k
>> market with new hardware and software being made.
>> 
>> gcc is just one part of the port, others parts like the Linux kernel or
>> the Debian ports are actively maintained as I mentioned in my initial mail.
> 
> To me your «no» actually means «yes».  When we're talking manpower, it's
> about the right people with available time and ability.  It's not about
> the number of warm bodies, so if there's just a single person who is
> able to do this work and they don't have the time, the port is missing
> absolutely critical manpower.

As I explained in my previous mail: The development task here is something that goes a little beyond normal maintenance work and hence requires someone to work with a longer dedication on the task.

While gcc is free software, it doesn’t mean the work on it is free. I think we all know that without commercial support, free software wouldn’t be able to survive these days.

All I am asking is for a one-time donation.

> Keeping the toolchain working is a pretty essential requirement for
> keeping a port alive, and I don't think it's viable to base the ongoing
> toolchain maintenance for a port on fundraising.

Maintenance isn’t the same as a one-time porting effort. Normal target maintenance work is usually a matter of discovering bugs and fixing them unless you are a port with commercial support where paid developers are working on supporting new features and hardware on a regular basis.

>>> I don't think spending $1-5k would be the best use of Debian
>>> funds.
>> 
>> Is that really that amount of money? Paying a developer is normally
>> a lot more expensive.
> 
> You were the one who suggested that sum, not me.
> 
> As a general rule, I don't think Debian should pay developers to write
> software.  (There are some exceptions such as outreachy, but they are
> few.)

Does that mean you would agree to supporting the effort if the developer came from a minority group? (It might actually be the case here.)

Kind Regards,
Adrian

Reply to: