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: 103376,6deb3e1ddefb099
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8
Received: by 10.68.223.40 with SMTP id qr8mr5270859pbc.0.1337822031497;
        Wed, 23 May 2012 18:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 pr3ni37811pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!npeer03.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.flashnewsgroups.com-b7.4zTQh5tI3A!not-for-mail
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Companies Only Offering Ada-95 Compilers
References: <jp5dug$mi5$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 	<26eba77d68c700b0513a1aaa8cb53fa8@dizum.com>
 	<jpakjt$guu$1@dont-email.me> <82zk90e86n.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 	<op.weqgoag0ule2fv@douda-yannick>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 21:12:27 -0400
Message-ID: <827gw2xtz8.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (windows-nt)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+LNeyssibFNwtT3j7lF6hQoTeIo=
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Complaints-To: abuse@flashnewsgroups.com
Organization: FlashNewsgroups.com
X-Trace: a440b4fbd8aefe029e66121281
X-Received-Bytes: 1698
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2012-05-23T21:12:27-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:

> Le Tue, 22 May 2012 14:01:20 +0200, Stephen Leake
> <stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org> a écrit:
>>> The GPL 2 to GPL 3 comment has caught my attention. Given that the
>>> FSF Ada
>>> runtime libraries come with the GMGPL exception, what issues are raised
>>> by the GPL 2 to GPL 3 conversion ?
>>
>> None; he's spreading FUD.
>>
>>> I am assuming I have missed something, but I don't know what.
>>
>> The language has changed in detail, because GPL 3 provides a general
>> mechanism for specifying things like GMGPL. But the meaning is the same;
>
> Do I understand correctly if I understand there will be no need for
> the GMGPL specific text anymore, and now just simply the GPL v3
> exception will  do the trick?

Yes.

-- 
-- Stephe