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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,TO_NO_BRKTS_FROM_MSSP 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 09:43:39 PST Path: newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!feed.textport.net!newsranger.com!www.newsranger.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Ted Dennison References: Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released Message-ID: X-Abuse-Info: When contacting newsranger.com regarding abuse please X-Abuse-Info: forward the entire news article including headers or X-Abuse-Info: else we will not be able to process your request X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsranger.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 12:43:20 EDT Organization: http://www.newsranger.com Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:43:20 GMT Xref: newsfeed.google.com comp.lang.ada:6983 Date: 2001-04-27T16:43:20+00:00 List-Id: In article , Emmanuel Briot says... > >"David Botton" writes: > >> Is there any plans to have a public version of XML\Ada with the GNAT >> Modified GPL? > >This is not the plan currently. Ahhh. I'd foolishly assumed that the GPL was only going to be used for 0.x releases. >We will release soon some GNAT-Modified GPLed versions of the library to >our customers that want support for XML/Ada and want to use it in their >proprietary application. You do realize that the GNAT-Modified GPL does not prevent your customers from redistributing the software you give them to anyone/everyone else with the GMGPL? Using easier Free Software licenses as a sales lever may only net you all of 1 extra customer. :-) But then you guys know way more about this business than I do... >However, we will probably leave the public versions under the GPL. This means >that people can easily use this library for student projects, and for testing >the technology. That just means that XML\Ada will most likely *not* become the one standard Ada XML parser, and someone else will probably end up writing a competing parser under licensing terms more akin to the GMGPL. Why not just use the same lever that you do with the Ada compiler? You could claim that the only versions of XML\Ada certified to pass the XML conformance suites (or whatever it is they call them) are the ones you directly distribute to customers. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com