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=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,e5509d13ad9d5a78
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.comcast.com!news.comcast.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 22:29:45 -0600
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 23:16:28 -0500
From: Jeffrey Creem <jeff@thecreems.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GPLv3 and the GMGPL
References: <Kg8Gf.272191$vl2.72054@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <Kg8Gf.272191$vl2.72054@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <7t7ob3-uav.ln1@newserver.thecreems.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.147.74.171
X-Trace: 
 sv3-nIqnDdhEI3Dc1FnEBZ6cEpL6R8vbdBF2Kjlw03LJHgkd5MkSgYtbO96LADUb9irSG1ixFNq9sQR7zwQ!Ro4FOEnLEpJ/0FKKXbYKWdrCWdbup0gks9WYu/aQvkIojIi5vHxt9oEGFY1RjJXmLYI6FDvX11Tk!Od4=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.32
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2810
Date: 2006-02-07T23:16:28-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Nick Roberts wrote:

> I am curious. Does anyone have any plans to use the GPLv3 for an Ada 
> project? If so, why? Do you think it would obviate the need for the GNAT 
> modification for your project?
> 

I don't see anything in that wording that attempts to take the place of 
the GMGPL.

It is solving a different problem. If I were to release a general 
purpose library under the GPL V3 and someone used it to create a 
program, they would be required to license their program under the GPL 
(or at least a "free" as in speach software license). That is fine if 
that is what I want, but if I want something closer to a slightly 
relaxed set of LGPL rules I still need GMGPL to get there for a language 
like Ada or C++.

The new exception in the GPL V3 is there so that if I create a program, 
and I want it to be a GPL program, I can meet the terms of the GPL when 
I distribute the source code without having to distribute source code 
for the OS, compiler and standard libraries (e.g. florist) in order to 
be GPL compliant.