From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: SGI GNAT Question? (Long)
Date: 1999/03/07
Date: 1999-03-07T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7buaj6$5al$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 36E294AB.86AFBA58@Botton.com
In article <36E294AB.86AFBA58@Botton.com>,
David Botton <David@Botton.com> wrote:
> I think Robert Dewar was referring to those parts of GNAT
> which were written by ACT. There is no reason why he
> could not withhold further development of these portions
> or re-release those portions as separate packages not
> under the GPL.
Well not "he" (I don't hold the copyrights) but rather ACT.
Of course as I have emphasized, ACT is a 100% open source
committed company, and we fully intend to make all our
current and future technology available under the GPL in
open source form.
Part of the reason I emphasize the legal situation here is
that the open software community needs to understand that
this kind of proprietarization is possible, and to keep a
close watch on it, and yell loudly where appropriate!
> As an illustration, the program PINE branched about a
> year ago in to a GPL version and a non-GPL version. GNAT
> as it is today can not be taken away, but that doesn't
> mean that future work has to be made public or under the
> GPL.
This is precisely the sort of thing I am concerned about.
Open source software at many companies is constantly under
pressure from a more conventional (e.g. venture capital)
point of view that the way to make money on free software
is to make it proprietary.
At ACT, we have no investors to keep happy. The only
investment in ACT were from its participants (officers
working for free for a while, some small loans from
officers, and a few deferred paychecks early on, other
than that we ran from revenue). At this stage, ACT has
been on a firm financial footing for quite a while, with
all its bills paid, the payroll met on time, and money
in the bank. We are not getting Bill-Gates style
rich, or even typical-broker-on-wall-street rich, but we
are doing fine, and most importantly we are not beholden to
investors with more interest in money than in Ada.
We plan incidentally to release a financial report at the
end of the calendar year. We don't have to do this, since
we are a private company, but we think the Ada community
will be pleased to know that a company with 100% Ada
orientation can be financially viable.
> Is copyleft a legal term?
no, defintely not!
> I thought it was slang for the copyrighted software that
> used copyright law to keep information public instead of
> private. I'll look it up.
yes! that's right, and in my experience the term has caused
quite a bit of confusion, so we never use it.
Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-03-07 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-03-02 0:00 SGI GNAT Question? (Long) Paul Colvert
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Gautier
1999-03-02 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-03 0:00 ` Paul Colvert
1999-03-03 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-04 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-04 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` root
1999-03-07 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-08 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` root
1999-03-07 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-08 0:00 ` root
1999-03-09 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-10 0:00 ` Chris Morgan
1999-03-10 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` Chris Morgan
1999-03-10 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` Some GNAT history (was Re: SGI GNAT Question? (Long)) dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-09 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1999-03-11 0:00 ` Arthur Evans Jr
1999-03-11 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-07 0:00 ` SGI GNAT Question? (Long) David Botton
1999-03-07 0:00 ` robert_dewar [this message]
1999-03-05 0:00 ` bourguet
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` GNAT Field Test scope (was SGI GNAT Question) Larry Kilgallen
1999-03-04 0:00 ` SGI GNAT Question? (Long) dennison
1999-03-02 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-03-02 0:00 ` GNAT discussions should be here as well kvisko
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Samuel Mize
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Mike Silva
1999-03-02 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-02 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox