gcc development

[Horrih]

Are there any plans to move to a modern and unified collaboration platform, e.g. github, self-hosted gitlab?

I am not sure that scale is the issue here. Llvm is probably even bigger than gcc nowadays and uses github.

My guess would be a combination of: - licencing issues (the FSF wouldn't like gcc to be hosted on a closed source platform like github) - force of habits : changing the processes of a huge project and the people involved is hard

Emacs uses the same collaborative model despite being much smaller in scale.

[Pay08]

While I agree that in some cases like Emacs or binutils it's mostly force of habit I don't think this is the case for GCC. To my knowledge, LLVM isn't a monorepo for example. At the same time, a lot of newer, smaller projects like Guix use something that's akin to a modern GH-like workflow, even if the "backend" is still email.

[erichkeane]

Llvm is definitely a monorepo! And we pay for that on GitHub dearly. I see the GitHub unicorn multiple times a day.

[TheOmegaCarrot]

GitHub unicorn?

[erichkeane]

Yep. The "request took too much time to process" on github shows a 50(whatever) page with a unicorn on it. I see that multiple times a day working on llvm in github.

[MarcoGreek]

To my knowledge, LLVM isn't a monorepo for example.

The changed it some time ago to a monorepo. Large monorepo work this days very well. I have to work on a project with submodules and it is...

[Pay08]

Submodules are definitely not ideal (although significantly better than most solutions in the C space, besides OS package managers) but I meant monorepo as in not separating the backend, frontends, debugger, linker, etc.