Re: Conflicting statements about GPS?

[Mark Johnson <mark_h_johnson@raytheon.com>]

John Stoneham wrote:
> 
> I am, surely like most on this ng who use gnat, eagerly awaiting the
> any-week-now release of GPS. However, after combing through what I could
> find as "official" statements about it (mainly from Robert Dewar), I have
> become concerned. One statement clearly emphasised that GPS was "Free
> Software", which would benefit from the input of many users, and this raised
> my hopes. But the only statements regarding it's release that I could find
> referred to those using Gnat Pro, which is not free.
> 
Well, as a beta tester of GPS, there is nothing I have received from ACT
to indicate that GPS would not be made freely available. We have a copy
under our support contract and the beta agreement. We have not yet asked
for source code - we are quite willing to wait until it is released -
thank you.

> Maybe I'm mistaken about the "Free Software" reference, but I don't believe
> it can be properly labled as such if it is only offered "free" to paying
> customers. Nor do I think it proper to call it "Free Software" if it is only
> intended to be offered for free after a major upgrade to the paying
> customers, and the "free" part is the old version made freely available
> after a year or more. But maybe that's just me.
> 
Eh? I guess you should read some of the other responses which more
clearly describes what is and is not allowed under the GPL. Let's say I
get a copy of the source to GNAT 3.15a1 (under our service contract),
ACT does not restrict redistribution. I can choose to freely make it
available (e.g., to my customer, others) or not. That meets the license
restrictions of the GPL.

> And maybe I'm wrong about what the process is going to be, but there is
> nothing to tell me otherwise so far. So Mr. Dewar, please correct me if I'm
> wrong. I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering.
> 
I think you are "wrong" [IMHO] for the reasons mentioned above. Also
please note that I'd be surprised if Robert responds on the newsgroup -
he has mentioned that he was going to stop monitoring comp.lang.ada.

  --Mark