Re: AdaBrowse 1.5 available

[Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>]

Thomas Wolf <t_wolf@angelfire.com> writes:

> - Is ASIS-for-GNAT in the gcc-gnat CVS tree? Without an
>   ASIS-for-GNAT for the gcc-gnat, it wouldn't make much
>   sense to put AdaBrowse there.

No, it hasn't been incorporated yet.

> - I didn't care about GNU coding guidelines or whatever when I 
>   developed AdaBrowse, so if it is to be put into the gcc-gnat
>   CVS tree (and supposedly, into the gcc distribution), there
>   may be some work to do in that respect.

Not a big deal, I think.

> - The source distribution doesn't contain any Makefiles. That also
>   would have to be added by somebody. (Building AdaBrowse is as
>   simple as "gnatmake -O2 adabrowse -lasis", so I didn't see the
>   need for a Makefile-based build procedure.)

This isn't a problem at all.

> - AdaBrowse uses (and its source distribution contains) a couple
>   of units that are *not* GPLed, but distributed under the more
>   permissive Ada Community License (the one used by the Ada 95
>   Booch components). I have no idea if this would be OK with GNU
>   policies. An option might perhaps be to use something akin to
>   the modified GPL as used by the GNAT library for these units.

Oh, this is a showstopper.  First of all, the FSF prefers to have
copyright assignments for all source code it distributes, but
exceptions have been arranged in the past.

The fatal problem, however, is incompatibility of the Ada Community
License with the GPL (the ACL imposes further restrictions).  If you
are in the position to relicense or dual-license the ACL code, you
would have to do this first.