David, I can understand that after all these long mail threads you over react
on my statements. But part of what you write is so much out of place and
character that I was really surprised. Let us first get the facts straight,
facts that I am sure you are aware of:
- GNUstep base is CI tested for clang in two different setups and nobody ever
wanted to change this.
- I had been using a Docker image with Ubuntu, clang, libdispatch and
everything to bug test GNUstep base with Coverity.
- I have always advocated the usage of as many different setups for GNUstep as
possible.
I wrote about my private development setup, that this is gcc based and the
reason for it. The reason was not that I reject the great development that has
happened in clang and libobjc2, which I really admire. It was a decision of
personal preferences and one of optimising my time spend on GNUstep. I know
that GNUstep gets used and tested with clang by others, I choose to provide the
gcc support for it. I never tried to enforce this decision on anybody else.
As for my local Docker image for Coverity, Docker stop to work on my MacBook
Pro half a year ago. That is why we never got Coverity scans for gui and
haven’t had any for base in half a year. What was the reaction from the GNUstep
developers? Nothing. Coverity scans, although something we discussed in Dublin
as well, were my private hobby. Apart from Richard looking into all the
reported issues at the time I never go much feedback on that. I can live with
that. This is a free software project. Everybody has the right to only follow
his/her personal preference. David, you used to share this position. It looks
like this has changed.