From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id bsWGArH8M2rQkg0AWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:12:01 -0400 Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=Z0ESnZ8w; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id EFFF81E098; Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:12:00 -0400 (EDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-25) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=ARC_SIGNED,ARC_VALID,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 Received: from vm01.sourceware.org (vm01.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:6:3111::32]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61EC91E024 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:12:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from vm01.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4005C4BA2E0C for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2026 14:11:59 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4005C4BA2E0C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1781791919; bh=7ZguxLjcprte2HyJtawOwGNtVT45sFUfijYfW2MEtaE=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=Z0ESnZ8wDb2zFEtUiRxVrUKBucmTnuEm7+MuKCgER3qUbG+Zc4It0pg9UxkmSzv9T oUNlQ3CSpuh1AdgHG3r+6Mjd/5PKz6tVGvnOgp8X0xmE0cklP5/CKcjEReWQiEm6ok Z1Y1kl5f0ysfSL3SxRiZlKAha3AX8njBrz/wPK8c= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B31E4BA2E0C; Thu, 18 Jun 2026 14:11:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 6B31E4BA2E0C ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 6B31E4BA2E0C ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1781791885; cv=none; b=VuGEsFYUo3eduwIHb7sSFDcx4aqJyS81Ag7WjkYUYCceLL7BhQ5jC9GqDttTn/5NOUNu1KRXOAOKUbAXCR0/MpzYWa5oH8a2jbnXLqNRAXHOVe2/FRZQebz5avyWatZMw5Qa7QVbHOG0RV4qkDpz/Qm6J7pRZ+ogBqNbxzxwhzI= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1781791885; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6SQ6HU8JXbnJkSI3IknC8JMlhn2425l62+NAGTO1yJc=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:Message-Id:From:To:Subject:MIME-version; b=m8DSW34TdUNC3z+pYSHRvH5PVVSxd9LWw/1nfppH8bfwtRct5UgE9LhQWrJGwQlxzmjKwW/FhUF/twicR0L5E5mm53ZFUtnus+0ChGkNFjzip7h7hQON88uV5AS471KNnYnvO9OEqNSWtaMYSoX5xEK4+QBOnaho2ZRLyKr/Nx8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; sourceware.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=gnu.org header.i=@gnu.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fencepost-gnu-org header.b=myPa+3CV DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6B31E4BA2E0C Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1waDSj-0006vs-Nf; Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:11:21 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 17:11:17 +0300 Message-Id: <86mrwsgcqi.fsf@gnu.org> To: Alexandre Oliva Cc: carlos@redhat.com, mark@klomp.org, pinskia@gmail.com, adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (message from Alexandre Oliva on Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:43:24 -0300) Subject: Re: Nominations for =?utf-8?Q?Anthropic=E2=80=99s?= Claude for Open Source program References: <5c2e18dd-807c-4331-b12c-a5b17b256f5b@linaro.org> <32efa4408237f7c0c19be0aa79c8f75a2df6e2ab.camel@klomp.org> <5158b893-6bb4-4856-acc8-876157671f34@redhat.com> <20260616110344.GI6729@gnu.wildebeest.org> <7cf212fa-e432-4603-bfec-33a2923a9b21@redhat.com> <86ldccifk0.fsf@gnu.org> <865x3gi9de.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-bounces~public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb" > From: Alexandre Oliva > Cc: carlos@redhat.com, mark@klomp.org, pinskia@gmail.com, > adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, > gdb@sourceware.org > Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:43:24 -0300 > > On Jun 18, 2026, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > That's plausibly Anthropic's motivation, but you accused David in > > advertising, not Anthropic. > > Yeah, just like the TV or influencer's channel (or radio, magazine, > newspaper, website, etc) who advertises someone else's product, what > they're doing is advertising. Is this a language issue, maybe? The original message was not a TV advertisement, either. And no, it isn't a language issue, not from my side anyway. > > David is not a company, nor is he (AFAIK) in any way related to > > Anthropic. > > It's almost as if you were arguing that getting someone else to post > your unsolicited commercial email makes it no longer be spam. No commercial email was posted here in that message, none at all. > > I'm disputing your uncalled-for attack on David > > Erhm. What attack? There's no attack on David, or on Carlos, for that > matter. What I'm doing is call out the initiation of the threads as > spam, and insisting that we shouldn't normalize or repeat that kind of > post, because it would be detrimental to our shared goals. You are attacking people by using denigrating language that characterizes their actions. > If I'm attacking anything, it's an idea, not a person. But I really > don't feel that it's an attack, it's just a civil debate, even when I > use strong words. It's clear that some people feel strongly about this > divisive issue, myself included, which might possibly twist some > perceptions. I suggest that you re-read your own messages. They tell a very different story. If you don't think so, maybe ask a friend to give you an independent opinion. > > No, because it was a legitimate post that doesn't qualify as spam or > > anything near it. You may think otherwise, but you are very wrong. > > Oh, how kind of you to let me know the ultimate truth that emanates from > wherever you get it. I'm not that privileged, I just happen to hold my > own opinions, and sometimes I try to express them to try to come to > agreement with others who don't seem to share them. Because these are > shared media, the alternative to coming to an agreement is for either > opinion to be imposed on other participants, which, as you seem to > suggest, is not cool. You are entitled to your opinions, but please make a point of expressing them politely. > And I haven't even raised yet the issue of David and Carlos legitimacy > to pick who gets assigned slots. Shouldn't that choice be for the > community to make democratically, as you say? As the choice on whether > to pass the "generous offer"? Or is this democracy you call for only > desirable when someone with access to the ultimate truth finds it > favorable? We can discuss this, but it is a separate issue.