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: 103376,2c7b0b777188b7c4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "Ludovic Brenta" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT GPL Edition Maintenance and Upgrades Date: 5 Oct 2005 07:06:17 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1128521177.691027.124580@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <1128499462.850353.146890@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <9070id.mp6.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <1128510619.707554.152420@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <07i0id.nkh.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: 212.190.145.10 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1128521182 24573 127.0.0.1 (5 Oct 2005 14:06:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 14:06:22 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <07i0id.nkh.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> User-Agent: G2/0.2 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; fr-FR; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040116,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) X-HTTP-Via: 1.1 SEVPXS01 Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=212.190.145.10; posting-account=ZjNXewwAAADyBPkwI57_UcX8yKfXWOss Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5405 Date: 2005-10-05T07:06:17-07:00 List-Id: Jean-Pierre Rosen a =E9crit : > Ludovic Brenta a =E9crit : > > Jean-Pierre Rosen a =E9crit : > >>I think that this argument goes *against* the spirit of free software. > >>As far as I can understand, the basis of free software is "you can do > >>anything with this software, *except* deny to others the rights you have > >>received". Anything, including proprietary software. > > > > > > Precisely. With the GMGPL, you receive the right to see and modify the > > source code of the GNAT run-time; but you can also deny others this > > same right. The GPL is more "free" than the GMGPL, since with it you > > cannot deny others this right anymore. > > Not exactly. With the GMGPL, you certainly cannot prevent anyone from > seeing the source code of the GNAT run-time; you are just not required > to provide it. But you can modify the run-time, ship it in binary only as part of your program, and prevent anyone from seeing your modifications. Thus, you can make a closed-source version of the run-time. > In the case of a compiler, it really does not make sense to restrict > what the compiler can be used for. Do you imagine distributing GIMP with > a notice saying that if you distribute any image produced with it, it > must be exempt of rights? This would certainly be perceived as a > restriction on freedom! Run-time library /=3D compiler. You yourself pointed that out today in a previous post. Therefore, your comparison with GIMP is incorrect, because GIMP does not include any "run-time library" into images. If you want independence from the run-time library and its license, you know what to do: pragma No_Run_Time. But this has been explained many times over already, here and in countless other places where a library is placed under the GPL (e.g. the Qt library, or the MySQL client library[1]). There seems to be a widespread perception that all libraries, especially ones that come with a compiler, must always allow writing proprietary software with them. This is not true: the authors of the library alone decide on that. You may object that "the GNAT run-time library is part of the Ada standard"; it is not. It is an implementation of the Ada standard, and as all implementations of any standard, it has its own license. I agree with you that this may have been a bad move, from a marketing perspective, both for AdaCore and for Ada in general (this is the "marketing argument"). [1] See myth #6 in http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/dispelling-the-myths.html I think it would be nice if AdaCore granted a FLOSS exception similar to MySQL's, thus addressing the "other free software argument" which concerns me quite a lot. [2] I've summarised all arguments earlier on this group; for reference see http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ada/browse_frm/thread/24ac770ebf31= 2b7a/586cefe12b7f4066?hl=3Dfr#586cefe12b7f4066 --=20 Ludovic Brenta.