comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Botton <david@botton.com>
Subject: Re: GNOGA v1.1 Released - Ada Cloud Desktop and Mobile Development
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 20:46:48 -0700 (PDT)
Date: 2015-07-09T20:46:48-07:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <318e5fe5-17bb-457c-93ae-4f8d774cce6d@googlegroups.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <592bdded-e693-40d3-a78f-84f4270c8008@googlegroups.com>

> Question: If there's a compiler taking .NET to ASM.js, then would the runtime encumbrance (or anything really) stick with if you processed it? After all, the output of that DOTNET-to-JS would be, at best, a "derivative work".

That is what the license virus does, it makes your work a derivative work and so get the GPL even if you don't want it and even if the FSF never intended it.

> And *IF* the runtime is encumbered, would it be feasible to use the pragma-restrictions to avoid it?

Given the past record of ridiculous claims like "downloading from site X overrides stated licenses" prank or false IP scares, I highly doubt you won't here claim the generated binder file is GPL so that pragma may not be enough. (There is no FSF .NET version).

David Botton


  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-10  3:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-01 14:43 GNOGA v1.1 Released - Ada Cloud Desktop and Mobile Development David Botton
2015-07-04  1:58 ` Shark8
2015-07-08 10:08 ` slos
2015-07-08 13:07   ` David Botton
2015-07-10  1:32     ` Shark8
2015-07-10  3:46       ` David Botton [this message]
2015-07-10 15:10     ` slos
2015-07-09 12:11 ` Vincent
2015-07-09 15:53   ` David Botton
2015-07-09 16:16     ` vincent.diemunsch
2015-07-09 18:11       ` David Botton
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox