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=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,fdd0e52bff1bc6fd X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: Seeking: Information about available Ada bindings Date: 2000/05/23 Message-ID: <8gf1j8$695$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 626346533 References: <392AB46D.465FDCAC@jhuapl.edu> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x69.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue May 23 22:43:55 2000 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 2000-05-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <392AB46D.465FDCAC@jhuapl.edu>, Rush Kester wrote: > As a member of SIGAda's Ada Bindings Working Group, I am hoping to put > together an exhibit of "Available Ada Bindings" for the SIGAda 2000 > Conference. > > If anyone, including vendors, would like to contribute ideas, please > contact me at > Rush.Kester@jhuapl.edu > > My goal is to highlight: > * Ada bindings available for COTS/Open Source software > * Tools for generating Ada bindings for new API's The presentation here seems to imply that somehow COTS and Open Source are distinct. In fact these are two orthogonal concepts. There can be software that definitely is NOT commercial off the shelf software but is still open source. Examples are unsupported research software that does not qualify as commercial, or specialized software that is commercial but not "off the shelf". On the other hand there can definitely be COTS software that happens to use a license that is compatible with the OSS definitions. Note that the only difference between typical open source software and software that is not considered open source is a) the availability of sources b) the nature of the license Certainly we consider GNAT to be COTS, it is most definitely commercial software, and it is most definitely off the shelf. Our "shelf" contains all sorts of standard software that we distribute and support. Yes, like most companies we also do specialized consulting that would not come under the COTS description. I make this point because this is not the first time I have run into an informal viewpoint that there is a divide between the notions of COTS and open source, and in fact this is an incorrect distinction. We are not talking about POTS (proprietary off the shelf software), but COTS, and most certainly open source software can be commercial. There are after all many large companies that are definitely commercial in nature and built around open source and free software. It is useful in such a catalog of bindings to talk about the licensing issues, as Ted pointed out, and also about whether the bindings are freely available and/or downloadable at no charge. But let's not create an artificial and unuseful distinction between OSS and COTS. Robert Dewar Ada Core Technologies Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.