Re: GNAT GPL 2005: Too clever by half?

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> 
> 
> Not for internal development; the GPL only kicks in if you want to
> distribute your program.  For internal development, GNAT GPL 2005
> Edition is just fine.
> 
Doesn't matter. Even if it is strictly internal development, a big 
corporation won't want to accept any restrictions on what they develop 
as their own IP. They don't know how they might want to use it tomorrow. 
If it has license restrictions on their IP, this might preclude them 
from selling it to someone on their own terms at a later date. Like I 
said, as a businessman, I would not accept that for anything I pay to 
develop.

Arguments that they could use another compiler (or buy support from ACT) 
won't really help. The path of least resistance will be to go with some 
alternative - and that alternative will likely not be Ada.


> But this is all the "marketing argument".
> 
Perhaps - but I think it is a losing marketing argument.


> 
> 
> 4) Use Debian, AIDE, Red Hat, MinGW, or any of the other binary
>    distributions that ship GNAT or GCC with Ada support under GMGPL.
> 
They tend to use Windows for most of this. They don't want to spend time 
trying to figure out how to get a compiler environment built for windows 
- they want to install it and get on with developing. Availability of a 
binary that is unencumbered with restrictions on their software may help 
- but for the tenuously held market, I'd really hate to see it be even a 
little bit harder to get something that would work.

Most companies don't want to spend money on hiring a bunch of geeks to 
get something to work. They want a disk full of software that just plugs 
in and they can go to town. They want it on their existing Windows 
platforms. They want it to install with the ease they are used to for 
other Windows software. If they can only get it with Linux, it becomes a 
dead issue. If they have to dork around with getting it to work on 
Windows, its a dead issue. They'll go somewhere else - there are 
alternatives.


> 5) Compile GCC and all required libraries yourself from the sources in
>    the CVS repositories.  These are under GMGPL.
> 
Unless they have some critical use, they won't spend time and energy 
building it for themselves. Nor would I.


> 6) Use GNAT GPL 2005 Edition unless and until they plan to distribute
>    their program in binary-only form.
> 
See the problem with a company's IP I identified above. Even if it is 
strictly internal, they won't want to be encumbered. They'll find 
alternatives.

> 
>>Perhaps there's a good capitalist business opportunity here?
> 
> 
> Yes, probably; I've said that before in this thread.  There appears to
> be a small market of people and companies willing to pay for minimal
> support.
> 
Most of the people I've got using Ada are using Gnat 3.15p (including 
myself) and they may not feel a need to switch (I don't). The issue may 
come up WRT Ada05. Unless there is some freely (or inexpensively) 
available Ada05 compiler that doesn't impose restrictions, my belief is 
that a large number of users won't look at Ada05 and will go down 
alternate routes. (Stick with what you've got and/or start migrating to 
C/C++ like "everyone else".)

Ada does not have some big, captive market and is thus not in a good 
position to start dictating T's and C's on people. The worst thing that 
can happen is that a perception may get started that "You can't use Ada 
for proprietary development like you can with other languages..."

Remember, the bulk of the users out there are not that sophisticated in 
distinguishing between a language and an implementation - and in a world 
with only a small number of implementations, there *isn't* much 
distinction. If they see that they can develop proprietary code with a 
gcc C compiler but can't develop proprietary code with a Gnat Ada 
compiler - you'll start hearing about how "You can develop proprietary 
code with C but you can't do it with Ada..."

MDC


-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm

Send Replies To: No.Mcondic.Spam@Del.Mindspring.Com
(Remove the "No.", ".Spam" and "Del." for the real address.)

     "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has
      been found difficult; and left untried."

         --  G. K. Chesterton
======================================================================