Re: Precisely why can't official FSF GNAT maintainers copy bug fixes in GNAT & its GCC-contained runtime en masse from GNAT GPL Community Edition?

[Mark Lorenzen <mark.lorenzen@gmail.com>]

On Friday, May 4, 2018 at 4:34:01 PM UTC+2, Dan'l Miller wrote:
> 
> Well, that actually brings up another can of worms to untangle:  Does AdaCore have a beyond-GPL contractual agreement for paying customers of GNAT Pro to refrain from distributing the source code that they receive with GNAT Pro?  Assuming that GNAT Pro is distributed under the GMGPL (and not a proprietary EULA) to paying GNAT Pro customers, under the terms clearly stated in the GMGPL, those paying customers would have a right to have the source code to GNAT Pro compiler and runtime.  Why do no GNAT Pro paying customers exercise their own right to distribute the GNAT Pro free(dom) source code that they receive under GMGPL?  Under the GMGPL (alone), they would seem to have a right to do so.  But paying customers of GNAT Pro have never ever done this.  There must be an extant reason why this redistribution has never ever happened in all these decades.  Do paying customers of GNAT Pro sign a side contract to refrain from distributing the source code to GNAT Pro, overriding the GMGPL?  Precisely which portion of GMGPL would permit such binding side contracts to restrict freedom of distribution of source code of GNAT Pro compiler and runtime?  Or does the GMGPL •categorically• prohibit such side agreements to restrict freedom of distribution of source code of GNAT Pro compiler and runtime?

My employer is (or rather was as the project is now finished) a paying customer. I can see that our copy of GNAT Pro for LEON3 ELF is licensed under GPL 3 with the Runtime Library Exception.

I guess we could redistribute our copy if we wanted to. There is no side contract, hidden agreement or secret handshake. You buy a support contract for a maximum number of developers based on the "honour system" i.e. you don't cheat. After downloading the SW you can use it without any license key, runtime license fee or whatever.

However, we (and probably a lot of other of AdaCore's paying customers) are in the business of developing software for *our* customers - not in the business of redistributing software with the legal risks that it *may* incur if e.g. if it turns out that some parts of GNAT Pro are not licensed under GPL or other legal issues like that. I don't think many customers can see a compelling business case for redistributing GNAT Pro.

Regards,

Mark L