Re: Questions about Ada Core Technologies

["Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net>]

First:
  The best way to get these questions answered is ask ACT.

Second:
  I monitor the gcc mailing list (gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc), and believe I know
the answers to some, but not all of these questions from monitoring that
list.


"Ludovic Brenta" <ludovic.brenta@insalien.org> wrote in message
news:87oeq4vkod.fsf@insalien.org...
> Hi
>
> I got some flak[1] about things I wrote in my draft Debian Policy for
> Ada.  While I prepare Draft 2, I would like to get some information in
> order to get some facts straight.  Here is a list of questions I have;
> please answer them only if you have first-hand knowledge; I am trying
> to dispel rumours and spread facts :)
>
> - Will ACT make more "p" releases of GNAT in the future?  They told me
>   privately they would, but has anyone else heard about a public
>   statement from ACT?  Is it too much to ask for a release date or
>   time frame?

The last I heard is that they have no plans to stop making tese releases.

> - Have ACT really switched their day-to-day development to the FSF?
>   The changelogs suggest so, in which case I can suppose they merge
>   selected changes to GNAT Pro in their private repository?

Of course ACT will be maintaining their own site.  They have customers that
depend on them and they cannot tolerate instability.

A few months ago there was an announcement on the gcc mailing list that ACT
would be updating the FSF repositoriy on a regular basis.  If I recall
correctly, Arnauld Charlet of ACT was made responsible for keeping the FSF
repository up to date.

> - Will the next GNAT Pro be based on FSF's GCC, or on ACT's private
>   repository?

ACT's private repository.  Over time the difference between the two will
continue to decrease.

> - Does ACT recommend anyone switch to GCC instead of GNAT 3.15p?  If
>   so, which version of GCC?
>

ACT doesn't recommend anyone use a 'p' release for serious work.  The public
releases are primarily released for academic use.  Of course the 'p'
releases are of good quality and could be used for serious work, but ACT
does not stand behind them.  For that you need to by GNAT Pro.

> - Does ACT request that customers not distribute copies of GNAT Pro?
>
> - Since GNAT Pro, as a derivative work from GCC, is necessarily
>   distributed under the GPL, is the above request not an infringement
>   of the GPL?
>
> - Just out of historical curiosity, could someone send me a timeline
>   of GNAT Pro releases?  Especially the ones after 3.15p went out: I
>   heard about 3.16a, 3.16a1, 3.17w, 5.01?, 5.02? etc.  and I would
>   like to know what version of GCC they used as a backend.
>

This has come up many times.  No.  You cannot get a time line for a public
release.
You can look at the GCC scheduled time line for releases, but you will find
that they too favor stability over deadlines.

I hope this helps,
Steve
(The Duck)

> [1] I mean I got *friendly* flak, kind of like error messages from an
> Ada compiler :)
>
> -- 
> Ludovic Brenta.