Re: Needed - Ada 2012 Compiler.

[Optikos <optikos@verizon.net>]

Maciej Sobczak wrote:
> Optikos wrote:
> > Maciej Sobczak wrote:
> > Optikos wrote:
> > > > Hence why Alex was correctly indicating
> > > > that GPL Community Edition forestalls
> > > > most practical forms of commercial
> > > > business activity 
> > >
> > > Wrong. You can write your program (or a 
> > > library) and sell it in the form of source 
> > > code with whatever license you wish 
> >
> > Certainly absolutely no one does that
> > regarding software that is strictly GPLv3
> > without the Runtime Library Exception! 
> 
> Wrong. But let's go back a little to better
> understand the workflow. 
> 
> 1. You write some code. It can be a standalone
> app or a library. 
> 
> 2. You can put whatever license you wish on
> your source code. 
> 
> 3. You can deliver it (the source code!) to your > users with that license. 
> 
> Finished. 

> OK, so you think it might be a good idea to
> verify this code a little bit before selling it to
> your customers - you know, test it or at least
> check whether it compiles at all. So you add an
> additional points to the scheme above: 
> 
> 1a. You compile your code with whatever
> compiler you have. 
> 1b. You run your tests or perform whatever
> other verification activities to make sure that
> your product has an expected quality level. 
> 
> These two points have no impact on points 2.
> and 3. above. 

Hypothetical “you” after hypothetical “you” and still more hypothetical “you” fictions.  Instead, please give actual names of extant actual projects or commercial products or companies that do as you say above:  receiving a pure-GPLv3 copy of upstream source code without the Runtime Library Exception then either dual licensing it and/or placing nondisclosure agreement (NDA) restrictions on downstream copies of that upstream-obtained GPLv3ed source code without Runtime Library Exception, which is the case that Alex & I are calling out as the sole topic of conversation here.