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,e5509d13ad9d5a78 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news2.volia.net!news.germany.com!news.nask.pl!news.nask.org.pl!newsfeed.pionier.net.pl!pwr.wroc.pl!panorama.wcss.wroc.pl!not-for-mail From: Waldek Hebisch Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GPLv3 and the GMGPL Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:51:11 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Politechnika Wroclawska Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: hera.math.uni.wroc.pl X-Trace: panorama.wcss.wroc.pl 1140655871 25776 156.17.86.1 (23 Feb 2006 00:51:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.pwr.wroc.pl NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 00:51:11 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/1.7.8-20050315 ("Scalpay") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.31 (i686)) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3083 Date: 2006-02-23T00:51:11+00:00 List-Id: Nick Roberts wrote: > The Free Software Foundation (FSF) - http://www.fsf.org - is currently > canvassing opinion before finalising a new version of the General Public > License (GPLv3). A draft is available for comment: > > http://gplv3.fsf.org > > Ada software published under the current version of the GPL (GPLv2) > tends to carry a special exception, which (since I suppose it originated > with GNAT) is generally called the GNAT-Modified GPL (or GMGPL): > > "As a special exception, if other files instantiate generics from this > Unit, or you link this unit with other files to produce an > executable, this unit does not by itself cause the resulting executable > to be covered by the GNU General Public License. This exception does > not however invalidate any other reasons why the executable file might > be covered by the GNU Public License." > > The new GPL (in its current draft) defines what it calls the "Complete > Corresponding Source Code" in a way suggests (to me) that the GNAT > modification might no longer be required, in many cases. This is because > the new definition provides an exception: > > "As a special exception, the Complete Corresponding Source Code need not > include a particular subunit if (a) the identical subunit is normally > included as an adjunct in the distribution of either a major essential > component (kernel, window system, and so on) of the operating system on > which the executable runs or a compiler used to produce the executable > or an object code interpreter used to run it, and (b) the subunit (aside > from possible incidental extensions) serves only to enable use of the > work with that system component or compiler or interpreter, or to > implement a widely used or standard interface, the implemention of which > requires no patent license not already generally available for software > under this License." > > I suspect that most of the actual difficulties the GNAT modification was > added to resolve are now solved by the new wording of the GPLv3. > GPL Version 2 section 3 contains the following: : However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need : not include anything that is normally distributed (in either : source or binary form) with the major components (compiler, : kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which the executable : runs, unless that component itself accompanies the executable. Both the the exception in GPL 2 and the quoted text form GPL 3 allow creation of GPL-ed programs which hook into closed-source infrastructure. GPL 2 is probably more explicit, but IMHO novelty of GPL 3 is that GPL 3 allows GPL-ed binary linked with closed-source JVM, while GPL 2 would exclude JVM (since usually it is not a part of the OS). GMGPL allows closed-source program which hook into GMGPL-ed infrastructure -- that is quite different. Disclaimer: I did not look at GPL 3, just comment the enclosed quote. -- Waldek Hebisch hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl