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: <449d2a28$0$11075$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <449d5c03$0$11074$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <6sbqsh6jv7.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> From: M E Leypold Date: 28 Jun 2006 03:54:21 +0200 Message-ID: <1bd5cujb8y.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: 88.72.243.222 X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151459286 88.72.243.222 (28 Jun 2006 03:48:06 +0200) X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.germany.com!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5173 Date: 2006-06-28T03:54:21+02:00 List-Id: "Jeffrey R. Carter" writes: > M E Leypold wrote: > > Please follow my other posts :-). Regarding what I'd call "the > > environment", like bindings to a portable GUI toolkit or the OS. > > OK. I have 2 GMGPL versions of GtkAda (2.2.0 and 2.4.0) and a GMGPL > version of GNAT (MinGW 3.4.2) on my computer at the moment. (These are > not the only compilers or bindings, just the ones that seem relevant > to this discussion.) GtkAda is a portable GUI toolkit and GNAT comes > with GMGPL bindings to the OS. All were free in terms of money. So I > don't see what your complaint is. That ACT denies they can remember that ever GtkAda was distributed a GMGPL. That is about all and at the core of all that. You understand that now? Even the older versions from the ACT site are now supposed to be under GPL ONLY, even if they didn't change from the way they very (as we remember) distributed as GMGPL. > It's also clear that ACT cannot legally impose the GPL on their > compilers the way they have. The DOD contract that resulted in GNAT > was to create an Ada-95 compiler that is free (in both senses of the Make me laugh. I got flamed repeatedly because I only suggested that the GMGPL -> GPL transition might not have been quite such a clear cut right of ACT to do and because I wanted to create "unfree programs" with "AdaCore's tools". > word) and may be used to create un-free programs. (These requirements > resulted in the GMGPL.) As there is no Ada-0X standard yet, there can > be no Ada-0X compilers yet, and in fact the ACT GPL compilers are > Ada-95 compilers that implement some of the features of the Ada-0X > draft only as an option. It seems ACT is calling them "200[5|6]" to > try to get around the requirements of the contract, but it's clear > that these are Ada-95 compilers with some extra features optionally > available, and so in violation of the contract. (I wonder who at the > DOD one would contact about this, since the AJPO no longer exists.) I rejoice, that you of all people here have found such clear words on that issue. I've a comment and a suggestion though: (1) The present headaches revolve around the changing license for libraries like GtkAda and Florist (to just name 2). The FSF compiler, if maintained properly, would suffice for most people as Ada 95 compiler. So the pressure to argue against Gnat GPL has somewhat diminished from a purely practical point of view. (2) I'm not sure wether this is only rumor, but I seem to remember something, that ACT has discharged its obliagation of keeping the compiler (a compiler) free by helping the FSF getting it back into the Gcc source tree. If of course you would find somebody at the DOD to contact, I think it would at least be intresting to see what exactly will happen. (This is out of my league, but sometimes it is entertaining an edifying to see the big players move). > > Of course, IANAL. IANAL2. Regards -- Markus