Re: Towards a free GNU Ada

[Chris Morgan <mihalis@ix.netcom.com.spam>]

James S. Rogers wrote:
> 

> > With respect I think this is a load of nonsense!
> 
> After having a private email conversation with Robert Dewar I must
> agree.
> 
> Having been the misguided soul who started this thread, I also want
> to point out how absurd my earlier statement was.
> 
> I hope I have learned a valuable netiquette lesson here.

I don't think you violated netiquette. It's fine to discuss these things
here and in fact in the past many of the discussions have led to useful
developments (e.g. the original discussions on wanting to have a GNAT
mailing list). Your post was thus properly "formed" but had some deeper
problems, it was thus a semantic error not a syntactical one :-)

I too have sometimes wanted GNAT releases before they were public but on
balance it's a good thing ACT do what they do. I spent some time as
technical representative of a project that had fully paid-for ACT
support. I found the ACT support to be better than that of most other
software companies, certainly as good as any other support we ever had.

Now I'm on the outside again sure I'll sometimes think "I wish I could
lay my hands on version x.x" (in fact I'm quite interested in the gdb
improvements and the SPITBOL-like string handling library in 3.10) but I
know that releasing it prematurely could delay 3.11, so on balance I
don't want it until it _is_ ready.
-- 
Chris Morgan <mihalis @ ix.netcom.com>
  "Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary,"