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: 103376,9a5f3bd162009c01 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2005: Too clever by half? References: <70e0e$4331acfc$4995583$14979@ALLTEL.NET> <87hdcew7wq.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <1127511077.919641.107390@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <87hdcasf3o.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <20eZe.3450$QE1.1476@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 21:25:35 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.16.43 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1127597135 209.165.16.43 (Sat, 24 Sep 2005 14:25:35 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 14:25:35 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5114 Date: 2005-09-24T21:25:35+00:00 List-Id: Simon Wright wrote: > > > But the only restriction is that if you compile with the GPL compiler > and release *that* binary you are affected; if you recompile with any > other GNAT you are not. Fair enough, but will there be a GMGPL version of Ada05? One that will install-and-go rather than one my customers will have to build from sources? I can keep using Gnat 3.15p forever (as can my customers) but will that line of compilers ever result in an Ada05? I understand that the Ada code *could* be compiled with a different compiler but a) Ada is not as portable as it wishes it were and b) going into the project, I've got to presume I won't have another compiler. (If I had another one, I'd probably use that one if this is the ultimate destination.) I'm not going to say "ACT - You owe me a no cost binary release of all your compilers..." I hope I'm being really clear on that. I'm merely pointing out two issues I see: 1) Making a public Ada compiler release that creates images that may not be released except under the GPL should be very visibly noted lest the uninformed start making assumptions about what they can legally do or not. (especially since you can do that with gcc and other non-Ada compilers rather readily) 2) Lack of a no-or-low cost Ada compiler for Ada05 (without restrictions) could hurt adoption of Ada. ACT can do as they want with all my blessings behind them and I hope they make lots of money and stay in business a long time. I'd also thank them for being wonderful guys and making public releases of Gnat in the past with no restrictions on what I can do with my own code. I hope that with Ada05, we get something similar lest it discourage Ada usage. MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: No.Mcondic.Spam@Del.Mindspring.Com (Remove the "No.", ".Spam" and "Del." for the real address.) "The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried." -- G. K. Chesterton ======================================================================