From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.107.111.26 with SMTP id k26mr2185653ioc.28.1523744903954; Sat, 14 Apr 2018 15:28:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6217:: with SMTP id g23-v6mr259470otj.11.1523744903803; Sat, 14 Apr 2018 15:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!e130-v6no1356307itb.0!news-out.google.com!u64-v6ni2445itb.0!nntp.google.com!k65-v6no1374446ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 15:28:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.233.194; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.233.194 References: <1388442297.545342755.856911.laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org> <5aea61e5-e795-4391-bcb6-4ba956cea394@googlegroups.com> <47b85c37-e84a-4b92-b1a2-ba7b11c49c3a@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <59eaa166-fc65-4e9d-85f2-cf14003db26c@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Ada-WinRT bindings - Alpha release From: "Dan'l Miller" Injection-Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 22:28:23 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 6178 X-Received-Body-CRC: 1140092504 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:51503 Date: 2018-04-14T15:28:23-07:00 List-Id: On Saturday, April 14, 2018 at 9:41:38 AM UTC-5, Simon Wright wrote: > "Dan'l Miller" writes: >=20 > > Conversely, Mono could conceivably now or in the future trivially > > utilize some portion of GCC somewhere in its build process of > > something=E2=80=94anything on which Ada-WinRT is downstream, even indir= ectly. > > This could trigger the =E2=80=9Cany work based on GCC=E2=80=9D clause i= n the Eligible > > Compilation Process, which would then revert Ada-WinRT's > > GPL-with-Runtime-Exception license to full-fledged GPL. This > > sneak-in-the-backdoor sequence of events years from now is > > specifically the kind of viralness that is feared from the GPL, > > including the GPL-with-Runtime-Exceptions. >=20 > You may be right, IANAL, are you? What exactly does "any work based on > GCC" mean, anyway? In jurisdictions of the USA where I live (Texas), the plain meaning of the = statutory law (and state and federal constitutions) as a sufficiently well-= read commonperson would understand the words & phrases & sentences & contex= ts to mean are what the words & phrases & sentences & contexts mean, unless= there exists an ambiguity caused by a misspelled word or an ungrammatical = construct in English. By that standard, the plain meaning as understood by= a common person prevails over any contortions by a lawyer. Hence, no lawy= er is needed to read and comprehend the LGPL and GPL, if the reader has com= pletely read those 2 contracts and has read & comprehended USA's copyright = law, such as at & near the URL below. In the USA's copyright law, (unless narrowed by =E2=80=9Coriginal=E2=80=9D = or =E2=80=9Cderivative=E2=80=9D,) =E2=80=9Cwork=E2=80=9D is shorthand for = =E2=80=98an original artifact or a verbatim copy thereof or a derivative co= py thereof=E2=80=99 so that that long phrase need not be instantiated over = & over again. https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html > > LGPL forces anyone modifying Alex's > > Ada-WinRT work to contribute those modifications publicly so that they > > get back to Alex. >=20 > I don't see that? LGPL looks so complicated that you would need a lawyer > to be sure. You don't see it, so let's all see it together. Under the plain-English me= aning of LGPLv3, modification to Ada-WinRT itself would not fall into any o= f LGPLv3's exceptions of creating a Combined Work (i.e., an application/exe= cutable as a linked file on persistent storage and/or as a link-loaded work= in RAM). Here are the steps that give application a right to copy a work = (i.e., DLL) derived from a modified source code of Ada-WinRT: 0) Modify Ada-WinRT in some way that the application/executable absolutely = needs (e.g., the fix of a severe bug without which application won't work). 1) in LGPLv3: =E2=80=9CUse a suitable shared library mechanism for linking = with the Library.=E2=80=9D [so that a software-freedom user of the applica= tion may install a further-modified variant of Ada-WinRT DLL underneath the= application] 2) in LGPLv3: =E2=80=9Cyou may convey a copy of the modified version =E2=80= =A6 under the GNU GPL, with none of the additional permissions of this Lice= nse applicable to that copy.=E2=80=9C [because without these words, applica= tion has no right to copy the modified the derived work (i.e., object code)= of the modified Ada-WinRT] 3) in GPLv3: =E2=80=9CYou may convey a covered work in object code form und= er the terms of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the machine= -readable =E2=80=A2=E2=80=A2Corresponding Source=E2=80=A2=E2=80=A2 under th= e terms of this License, in one of these ways: =E2=80=A6 Convey the object = code =E2=80=A6, accompanied by =E2=80=A6 access to copy the Corresponding S= ource from a network server at no charge.=E2=80=9D [which is the must-suppl= y-the-source-code-publicly that Simon Wright was not overtly seeing in the = LGPL itself, which is true that these words did not appear in the LGPL itse= lf, because the LGPL evoked these words from the GPL, not unlike calling a = subroutine.] 4) Alex downloads that modified source code from that network server (e.g.,= GitHub). 5) Alex incorporates that fix into the head-end source code of Ada-WinRT. Q.E.D. > > Alex is > > completely free and unfettered to choose whichever license he thinks > > best, considering all these ramifications. >=20 > Well, why not MIT then? Because people who modify Ada-WinRT would not be compelled to release their= modifications publicly, inhibiting Alex from merging them into head-end so= urce code of Ada-WinRT.