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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What is the best license to use for open source software?
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 00:14:25 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <87tx06rve6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
References: <0Kgqw.953330$_k.685364@fx16.iad>
	<199c826a-923e-497f-a8e2-9e732c8a5665@googlegroups.com>
	<87bnmetex4.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<4ae7f0d5-d681-4be9-95bc-b5e789b3ad40@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="358cc6f71ca44a21d5730c9987973c9a";
	logging-data="28530"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18s2oo94YLaFGWz/rAU30kZ"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xbDf05otpaJwrS7QB/otNSKdKtc=
	sha1:TD0v/x1nykUDRBxGhl8X6rqhMDw=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24349
Date: 2015-01-05T00:14:25+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

David Botton writes:
>> Please use correct words; you are creating confusion.  No version of
>> GNAT is shareware.
>
> GNAT GPL is shareware, a try before you buy product for GNAT PRO. I
> see no issue with calling it was it is and stopping the clear
> confusion that it has created that it is the "standard" gcc/ada GNAT
> tool chain available to the community.  Clarity doesn't come from
> making "believe" a GPL run-time designed to prevent commercial use is
> not shareware. They have the right to do it, we have the right to call
> it what it is. There is no shame in creating and promoting a shareware
> / trialware product. It ain't cool, but they have the right.

No. GPL software is *not* shareware and does *not* prevent commercial
use, except in your opinion.  Do not present your opinion as truth; this
is confusing.

>> The GMGPL has been superseded by GPL version 3 with run-time library
>> exception.
>
> It does seem that way, however I've noticed that many GPLv3 with
> run-time exception products include the "modified" text of the old
> GMGPL. Do you know if that is by design? I've left the "modified" text
> in Gnoga which is GPLv3 since it seems to be in most AdaCore
> products. If you tell me is an oversight by others I'll remove it from
> Gnoga as well.

Yes, it is a mistake to mix GPLv3 with runtime library exception with
GMGPL wording.  Use one or the other, not a mix of the two.

--
Ludovic Brenta.