In article <7fp5na$loj$1@cf01.edf.fr>,
  "Pascal Obry" <p.obry@der.edf.fr> wrote:
>
> Russell Senior a �crit dans le message <86lnfjx5rx.fsf@coulee.tdb.com>...
> >>>>>> "Robert" == Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com> writes:
> >
> >Robert> Indeed the whole point of the GPL is to avoid the
> >Robert> disadvantages of the proprietary model of software.
> >
> >Perhaps you could explain a little bit more about how it is in the Ada
> >Community's interest to not share the GPL'd commercial and wavefront
> >releases of GNAT.  Not being a member of that community, it is the
> >part I don't understand.
> >
>
> That's not a problem since members of the Ada community understand
> that part :-)

Well, perhaps some of us do...

But my personal interest or my personal agreement as a "member of the
community" isn't the issue. The issue is if this is all kosher by the GPL,
which it pretty clearly is.

Given several cases of beer and an evening to blow, I'm sure we could all as
a group come up with dozens of "better" development models for Gnat. But who
really cares? ACT certainly doesn't have to, and I don't even think I do...

--
T.E.D.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own