Re: GtkAda License Question

[Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>]

M E Leypold writes:
>> - GtkAda GPL edition (both version 2.4.1 and version "gps-3.1.3" are
>> included) is pure GPL
>
>> - GtkAda 2.4.0 from libre is GMGPL
>
>> - GtkAda from CVS is GMGPL (the headers have the exception.)
>
> Exactly this is where the problem starts. The CVS has GtkAda 2.8.0,
> but I won't build it if it is GPL-only. If the binary in the GPL GNAT
> bundle is based on identical sources, why would it be under GPL? If
> the sources are different, then either the CVS source builds better
> than the source on the GPL GNAT bundle or the other way round. Both
> situations would incite further questions.

When producing a GPL version, AdaCore simply remove the "exception"
paragraph from every file using a script before packaging the sources.
No magic, and no difference in the actual software.

>> In Debian, all libraries are GMGPL, except ASIS 2006 which will soon
>> arrive in Etch under pure GPL. Use Debian. Debian is good for your
>> mental health :)
>
> But only as long as the the upstream licensing doesn't change -- oh so
> suddenly -- to GPL. Then all us small developers of graphical gadgets
> have either to shell out > $15000 / year just for maintaining our
> smallish projects or we pull maintenance very suddenly.
>
> What joy.

That would be a good reason for a fork, then.  If sufficiently many
people are interested in the maintenance of these tools, it is a
realistic proposition.  But let's not think of a fork before it is
actually necessary.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.