Re: Lack of Mature Tools (was: Lockheed Martin, Green Hills, etc.)

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <87wvll7a5h.fsf@think.mihalis.net>,
  Chris Morgan <cm@mihalis.net> wrote:
> Are you really suggesting that if I see an announcement of a
new
> public release of gnat on comp.lang.ada and I then download a
file
> with that version number from cs.nyu.edu in /pub/gnat that it
may
> somehow be corrupted? The wrong file? Altered by random
strangers?

Probably not. The point I am making is that Ada Core
Technologies provides no kind of guarantees of any kind.
We have definitely seen cases where releases have been
altered (e.g. by omitting documentation). If you are
comfortable with taking responsibility yourself for this
possibility, then that's your decision.

> This seems like a surprising claim to me. I'll bet you (i.e.
> ACT) can be pretty sure that those bits correspond exactly to
> the ACT build of that public version just with a sum(1).

I would not be willing to make that statement, given that we
have seen counter examples. Also people often do not clearly
realize what Ada Core Technologies provides and what other
volunteers provide. We still get bug reports (and even angry
complaints sometimes) from users of the DOS version for example
even though that has nothing whatsoever to do with us.

> If you published checksums on
> www.gnat.com everybody else could be fairly sure as well, no
matter
> where they actually downloaded the file from. Better checks
are also
> easily provided (e.g. MD5) as seen on many other open source
or free
> software projects.

We don't publish such material, because this would make it
even more suggestive that we are taking responsibility for the
integrity of stuff on the net over which we have no control.

> Not doing that is perfectly fine, but claiming the resultant
> lack of verifiability leads to authenticity problems seems
> very weaselly to me.

Well as I say, if you are comfortable using unsupported bits
and taking responsibility yourself for authenticity, then you
do not have a problem. My point was just to make it clear to
people that if they follow this route, they are taking
responsibility for these issues.

> The value I found in having an ACT support contract pretty
> much started flowing after I got the bits myself and installed
> them.

Not quite sure what the above sentence means, but in any case
to repeat the point I am making, most organizations prefer to
use supported commercial software. If that is the case in your
organization and you are interested in using GNAT, then you
should evaluate GNAT Professional on the same basis as any
other commercial Ada technology.

If your organization is comfortable using unsupported software
and taking responsibility for obtaining a version of GNAT that
meets your needs, then that's fine with us, just so long as
you realize that we make no guarantees in this case. Indeed,
the classical Free Software disclaimer definitely applies
in this case:

11.  BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE
IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW.  EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE
COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM
"AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.  THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE
OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU.  SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE
DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING,
REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

12.  IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED
TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY
WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED
ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL,
SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF
THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR
LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE
PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH
HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES.

I reemphasize that Ada Core Technologies has no objections
to you using the public version of GNAT for any purpose you
like. We only recommend the use of the public version for
educational and research purposes, because we don't recommend
the use of unsupported software (certainly that's our own
internal policy at Ada Core Technologies).

The only issue here is that everyone is clear. We very often
get people who are quite confused on this issue. Back in
September, I had a "Y2K Compliance Officer" from some
organization literally screaming at me because we refused
to give Y2K certification for the public version

   "WELL WHO CAN GIVE THIS CERTIFICATION THEN?"

   "no one that I know of."

   "WELL THIS IS AN ACT PRODUCT RIGHT?"

   "no, that's incorrect"

More interchange, getting nowhere, and no doubt he ended up
deciding that Ada Core Technologies did not stand behind
its products :-)

Ada Core Technologies is committed to continued releasing
of public versions of GNAT, including full easily installable
binary releases. But these public products are NOT products
of our company, merely something we make available on an
as-is basis for those who can make use of unsupported software.

Robert Dewar
Ada Core Technologies




Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.