From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,7684e927a2475d0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: can one build commercial applications with latest gnat and other licenses related questions... References: <449660f0$0$11077$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <1150717184.087134.177850@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1151050924.969806.284410@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <449d2a28$0$11075$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <449d5c03$0$11074$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> From: M E Leypold Date: 24 Jun 2006 21:26:10 +0200 Message-ID: <014pyajqy5.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.218.241 X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151176807 88.72.218.241 (24 Jun 2006 21:20:07 +0200) X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.germany.com!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4995 Date: 2006-06-24T21:26:10+02:00 List-Id: Georg Bauhaus writes: > But we don't complain that makers of Free Software disallow use of > their GPL tools and components for closed source software. If you > need that, pay them, if you can. George, I know I'm not consistent, but I'd like to point you to http://groups.google.de/group/comp.lang.ada/browse_thread/thread/3e26dfa741e64e5f/bbff925a8e74f167?lnk=st&q=Ada+Whalen+Dewar&rnum=4&hl=de#bbff925a8e74f167 which has a rather good exegesis of Steve Whalen on the point wether GNAT is ACT's to do with it what they want, and also a relevant rather lengthy Robert Dewar quote. After reading that you'll perhaps understand that the situation is not as cut and dried as it seems to you and also why I resent to being portrayed by you in public as someone just trying to sponge off ACTs God Given Property (i.e. Gnat). Gnat is not "their tool". They're licensing the code base under GPL themselves and the original DOD grants as well as the history of the last decade always imply some obligation to keep Gnat free, presumably for all users not only in the "free for free software sense". So any complaint of mine in the direction that they didn't follow that obligation any more, would have been fully justified. My issue actually was elsewhere (since a the FSF compiler is available) and than got bogged down in lots of (IMHO inappropriate) GPL philosophy. Nonetheless, thanks for the accusations. Regards -- Markus