>In the case of GCC, the FSF would do to the GCC community a great service if the copyright assignment process was streamlined as to make it less obnoxious.
Sounds like a valid complaint. This process should be made as steam-lined as possible. Has any non-controversial changes been suggested?
>The other glaring example is the issue with generating documentation from code.
Indeed, the GFDL seems like poor craftsmanship (I am thinking of the incomatible with GPL part of it here). I would prefer CC-BY-SA, but I do see a value in protecting parts of the documentation from exclusion or alteration. Not sure whether the value justifies the drawbacks though. Do you know the current status here, is there any efforts to improve GFDL? Does FSF allow other licenses on documentation?
>The remark made by Paolo about the coding standards and C++ is not that every GNU software should be re-written in C++, but that since some GNU software is (like GCC), the coding standards should acknowledge this.
This should hardly have anything to do with RMS. AFAIK, he is not a C++ programmer, so others will need to step up if coding standards are to be established. Judging by the attitude towards the existing C standards, I am actually a bit in the dark as to whether coding standards are even wanted. Are you sure you want it? If so, are you sure you want FSF to provide it, or that it should be provided as one standard across all GNU projects at all?
With respect to diplomacy, I am not sure what to think. Linus is not exactly known for diplomacy nor tact, but whatever he does, it works.