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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c9ea66d3dcd0bfcf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-04-27 17:38:15 PST Path: newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!unlnews.unl.edu!newsfeed.ksu.edu!nntp.ksu.edu!news.okstate.edu!dvdeug From: dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT license rational (was [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released) Date: 27 Apr 2001 18:52:59 GMT Organization: Oklahoma State University Message-ID: <9ccf6b$aai1@news.cis.okstate.edu> References: <5viG6.1064$SZ5.86996@www.newsranger.com> Reply-To: dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org NNTP-Posting-Host: x8b4e53d6.dhcp.okstate.edu User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.0 (Linux) Xref: newsfeed.google.com comp.lang.ada:7005 Date: 2001-04-27T18:52:59+00:00 List-Id: On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 18:02:41 GMT, Ted Dennison wrote: > as they were of the opinion that linking GPL-ed packages into their program > would require them to make the whole program GPL-ed. Which is correct. > Now if you are asking why this was done, rather than only allowing paying > customers that exception like they are talking about doing for the XML parser, > you would have to get a ruling from ACT on that one. But it really is their call > to make either way. Not wrt to GNAT, as the copyright on that is owned by the FSF. FSF would have probably objected to ACT offering a different license to its customers than to the general public. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org "I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg