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 10.236.41.166 with SMTP id h26mr25869517yhb.37.1423053051768; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 04:30:51 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.106.233 with SMTP id gx9mr198511obb.0.1423053051384; Wed, 04 Feb 2015 04:30:51 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!bm13no6029638qab.0!news-out.google.com!qk8ni25140igc.0!nntp.google.com!hl2no7146052igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 04:30:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1423034861.30930.71.camel@obry.net> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=73.46.72.234; posting-account=yiWntAoAAAC1KqC_shmxJYv07B9l6LNU NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.46.72.234 References: <0Kgqw.953330$_k.685364@fx16.iad> <199c826a-923e-497f-a8e2-9e732c8a5665@googlegroups.com> <87bnmetex4.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4ae7f0d5-d681-4be9-95bc-b5e789b3ad40@googlegroups.com> <87tx06rve6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <87lhlirpk0.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4984c229-bdcd-4032-bd88-cde66482e6df@googlegroups.com> <6950687c-7b03-440e-ba15-e1092f86a3d0@googlegroups.com> <1423034861.30930.71.camel@obry.net> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <601f3847-4768-40af-88f0-92832ca99153@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware From: David Botton Injection-Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 12:30:51 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24873 Date: 2015-02-04T04:30:51-08:00 List-Id: > "licence gun" is a bit strong to me. It is strong and meant to be. Ada advocacy was shot by the change. > The only difference with GPL No, there is a difference for advocacy do to market perception and needs fo= r small developers. I've discussed this many times, consulting customers don't care what you ex= plain about GPL licensing. From a small real estate office to multi-billion= dollar companies, almost no one will accept a consultant choosing a tool t= hat forces GPL on their "IP". > Isn't this an option for you? I would never have chosen to write a single line of Ada had the runtime had= the GPL virus when I started. I specifically chose Ada because of the GMGP= L and I specifically stopped developing (for years) public Ada projects sin= ce with out it Ada is a waste of any developers time not employed by someon= e in the AdaCore niche customer demographic. Things have changed enough with non-license virused FSF gcc/ada for me to i= nvest time again in Ada and Ada advocacy. Ada advocacy still needs stronger work on marketing FSF Ada as the professi= onal choice for non-safety critical system and packaging (both in terms of = available tools and libraries that are GMGPL and actual delivery on Windows= , etc). Advocating Ada already takes a lot of effort to educate others to understan= d why it is more beneficial, we don't need to be forced to educate them als= o about the GPL as a beneficial as a social movement to be part of that adv= ocacy. Even the FSF realizes that is a mistake... David Botton