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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: gnat-3.10 Date: 1997/06/23 Message-ID: <1997Jun23.102715.1@eisner>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 252026710 X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org References: X-Nntp-Posting-User: KILGALLEN X-Trace: 867076047/29382 Organization: LJK Software Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Ronald Cole writes: > dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: >> We have a number of large customers on HPUX. They were using 3.09 when it >> was the current release, most of them have by now switched to 3.10 which is >> the current product release. As usual, this will be released publicly in >> the future. > > GNAT is based on GCC, right? What section of the GPL are you relying > on to justify making binary releases of modified GPL software to your > paying clients and refusing to make the source code available to the > public at the same time? Under Section 3 of the GPL, it seems clear > that once you distribute an object code work based on a GPL'd program, > you must release the source code concurrently. I thought the rule was merely that one had to distribute source to those to whom one distributed the binary, without restriction on their right to redistribute. Certainly requiring an innovator to engage in distribution to other individuals would be an onerous burden. Since ACT chooses to use the Internet for their distributions anyway they can make public "distributions" cheaply, but the fact that they do so should not burden them any more than any other innovator. The general way of getting the sources would then be to find one of those large customers who are paying for support. I would advise a gentler approach than has been used in this thread. Larry Kilgallen