Re: GNAT GPL Edition Maintenance and Upgrades

[Niklas Holsti <nobody@nowhere.fi>]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Steve Whalen wrote:
> 
>> From 1994 to 2004 that meant that small shops that must do
> 
>  > proprietary closed source work to survive, but who cannot at
>  > least initially afford a vendor's support were able to use a
>  > commercial quality (but not validated) compiler called GNAT.
> 
> I'm curious. Do you actually know of any commercial software
> written in Ada? That is, a program written in Ada which is sold
> as a non-customized, shrink-wrapped product to multiple customers?
> Do any of them show up here in c.l.a? Are they complaining?

I am not the original poster, but in part answer to your question, 
I am writing software in Ada that is meant to be sold mainly as a 
non-customized product to multiple customers.

I did "complain" about GNAT GPL 2005 in the sense that I voted for 
some other GNAT (that is, a GMGPL GNAT) to be the Debian Ada 
compiler. But I see that GNAT GPL 2005 has many advantages, 
perhaps most importantly less work for the Debian Ada team. I am 
prepared to use some of my own effort and money to have a non-GPL 
compiler, for example the FSF GNAT. I am also experimenting with 
the Janus/Ada compiler. The price of the Aonix compiler would be a 
significant hurdle for me and GNAT Pro is beyond my ceiling at 
this time.

So, that's one data-point for you. As I recall, some of the others 
who voted for a GMGPL Debian compiler were in the same position.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .