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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.68.95.100 with SMTP id dj4mr5622240pbb.9.1422636510166;
        Fri, 30 Jan 2015 08:48:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.182.22.1 with SMTP id z1mr51441obe.30.1422636509601; Fri, 30
 Jan 2015 08:48:29 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!hl2no4950339igb.0!news-out.google.com!qk8ni19963igc.0!nntp.google.com!hl2no4950338igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 08:48:29 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <mae6qs$d09$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=173.18.241.25;
 posting-account=HQu3XwoAAACgXAZiVLlGuYCkuhxw8i0w
NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.18.241.25
References: <0Kgqw.953330$_k.685364@fx16.iad>
 <199c826a-923e-497f-a8e2-9e732c8a5665@googlegroups.com>
 <87bnmetex4.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <4ae7f0d5-d681-4be9-95bc-b5e789b3ad40@googlegroups.com>
 <87tx06rve6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <d865c2cd-dd78-4dd9-8ca5-7526bc781faf@googlegroups.com>
 <87lhlirpk0.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <bb6afd60-da67-4b0a-93ca-2921b985cc3e@googlegroups.com>
 <m8ds96$po2$1@news.albasani.net> <m8em0g$a03$2@dont-email.me>
 <4984c229-bdcd-4032-bd88-cde66482e6df@googlegroups.com>
 <mae0l9$gn1$1@dont-email.me>
 <mae6qs$d09$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <dd0af6d6-f6bb-4330-bbf9-b888108df90b@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware
From: "Jedi Tek'Unum" <jeditekunum@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:48:29 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:24815
Date: 2015-01-30T08:48:29-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 2:57:34 PM UTC-6, bj=F6rn lundin wrote:
> On 2015-01-29 20:12, Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> > On 01/29/2015 05:58 AM, Lucretia wrote:
> >>
> >> They're not identical feature-wise. Pro has more work put into it than=
 GPL as
> >> does GPL over FSF. Therefore, it is crippleware as FSF is buggier than=
 GPL
> >> and GPL is buggier than Pro. One feature in Pro may be completely brok=
en in
> >> FSF and partially working in GPL. God, it took them years to sort out
> >> interfaces.
> >=20
> > IIUC, GNAT GPL is a snapshot of GNAT Pro at some point with the license
> > exception removed. They then diverge as work on Pro continues.
> >=20
>=20
> As I understood it, this is partially correct.
> But I _think_ that paying customers, that
> reports bugs that they think will compromise (somehow)
> their business may have the bug-fix in gnat pro only, and
> not merge it to gnat fsf or gpl.
>=20
> So I wonder if gnat gpl really is a true snapshot.
>=20
> I seem to recall that I've had code that compiles with
> fairly old gnat pro (say 5.01), but not with gpl.
>=20
> But I do not remember the details anymore.

GPL violators are common but nowhere else is an entire language held hostag=
e.

Even commercially-originated languages (Java) are light years ahead in adop=
tion.