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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,62a0ce08269e2cbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-12 04:56:21 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.mathworks.com!btnet-peer0!btnet!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news2-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "chris.danx" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: windows bindings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 12:51:24 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.253.8.187 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news2-win.server.ntlworld.com 1002887471 62.253.8.187 (Fri, 12 Oct 2001 12:51:11 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 12:51:11 BST Organization: ntlworld News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14381 Date: 2001-10-12T12:51:24+01:00 List-Id: > > Gwindows looks like a good candidate, however there are some issues that > > come to mind. > > > > The first is license compatibility, the project will use the 'MIT > License'. > > What is the MIT Lic? The same license as X is distributed with, on sourceforge they call it the mit license. http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html > GWindows comes under the GMGPL not sure why this > creates a problem regardless of lic. I've asked here before but not got any reply (lost in the 'is Ada dying' thread? ) on the issue of what this license allows and how it affects tools written with tools that use it, hence my confusion as to compatibility. I believe the X (MIT or OpenGroup) license is compatible with the GPL but I wasn't sure how compatible it is with the GMGPL. Has anyone wrote a simplified (i.e. not in legal jargon) summary of the GMGPL license that describes what it allows like the ppl have tried to do with the GPL? > Any changes to GWindows would of course > come under that lic., but code with'ing GWindows should not be 'infected'. Brill. > > The second is using OpenGL with GWindows (which admittedly I haven't > looked > > at) > > No biggy. GWindows gives you direct access to the Windows Handles, etc. so > hooking in to any of the available OpenGL bindings should be a non issue. That's great. > Even though my main focus is on promoting Ada, I certainly am a believer in > the GPL (where it doesn't conflict with the main focus :-). Writing "free" > software certainly seems more natural on a "free" compiler ;-) Normally I'd feel the same. The goal for the future is to have a degree of compiler independance, but that looks a longway off at present. i.e. I'll worry about that later (there are likely going to be a few C developers on the C implementation, but I'm the sole Ada developer, which is very worrying all things considered), and if need be port Gwindows to ObjectAda if it's still going strong. Thanks, Chris