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-Thread: 103376,d311338eabd7ca93 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.189.72 with SMTP id gg8mr2197057pbc.4.1328191528214; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:05:28 -0800 (PST) Path: lh20ni252354pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Erich Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Compiler business prospects Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 05:40:40 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <4f27e278$0$6549$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <12716838.1333.1328020580723.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prhq14> <82fwetfu0r.fsf@stephe-leake.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.136.113.73 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328191528 1907 127.0.0.1 (2 Feb 2012 14:05:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 14:05:28 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: k6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com; posting-host=193.136.113.73; posting-account=nd46uAkAAAB2IU3eJoKQE6q_ACEyvPP_ User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKC X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Ubuntu; X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/9.0.1,gzip(gfe) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: 2012-02-02T05:40:40-08:00 List-Id: > If you are asking for non-open-source commercial software, that is also > a different matter. > Can you be more precise about what your problem is? Sure, but I'm not sure if it's wise, because presumably this has been discussed already in the past. Look, I have nothing against the GPL and am even planning to release some smaller projects under the GPL, but the fact of the matter is that you *cannot* successfully sell shareware or run a small business under the GPL because someone will grab the source code and give his version away for free. That's just a fact. BTW, there is no real problem for me because I'm already using Racket successfully for my GUIs. I was just a bit disappointed that there seems to be no way to use Ada for that. Languages like the following ones offer free (as in beer) LGPL bindings to GUI toolkits: C++, tcsl, Perl, Ruby, Racket, FreePascal, ... just to name a few. For successful shareware business the key is to provide executables for each major platform that run immediately out of the box with a native and well- crafted GUI. Toolkits like Qt make that possible but unfortunately Ada is the only language I've seen so far where you have to pay for bindings that allow non-GPL distributions. > Source: http://www.qtada.com/en/licensing.html > Providing the OP enjoy Qt (I personally don't, except for platforms where > it's the native toolkit). Yes, but how much is the GMPL license? I suppose the problem is that QtAda must be based on the commercial version of Qt, because otherwise you wouldn't be allowed to statically link to the Qt libraries, and of course I understand when people want a return for their investment.