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: 103376,7684e927a2475d0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: can one build commercial applications with latest gnat and other licenses related questions... References: <449660f0$0$11077$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net> <1150717184.087134.177850@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1151050924.969806.284410@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1151153353.337673.47780@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> From: M E Leypold Date: 24 Jun 2006 15:27:51 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.218.241 X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151155310 88.72.218.241 (24 Jun 2006 15:21:50 +0200) X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4976 Date: 2006-06-24T15:27:51+02:00 List-Id: gshapovalov@gmail.com writes: > I am sorry for the repetition, but I feel I have to make it clear > again.. > > Michael Bode wrote: > > ...in an related thread there is a discussion of the license for > > GtkAda. I just looked at some source files of the CVS Version > > (https://libre2.adacore.com/cvsweb/GtkAda/) and they still read: > > > > ... > > -- As a special exception, if other files instantiate generics from -- > > ... > > Exactly because of this clause still in the specs and no COPYING > provided and somewhere in some file (not normally expected place) there > was a statement that is is *GPL* I contacted GtkAda developers to > clarify this (when I was repackaging GtkAda for Gentoo). This is the > responce I got: Ah. thanks. That's the first response I see to my question which might shed some light om the issue and is not based on generic legal IANAL-advice or rumours. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > From: Arnaud Charlet > To: George Shapovalov > Date: 19.5.06 10.20 > > George, > > All the packages available in libre.adacore.com are available under > the pure GPL license, this includes among others GtkAda and XML/Ada. > > Regards, > > Arno I don't think that's specific enough. He ist just talking about "package". The distributables in question are (for me): - GtkAda 2.4.0, Source as from libre (no license on site). - GtkAda 2.4.0, Win32 executables from libre (no license on site). - GtkAda 2.2.1, as advertised on freshmeat (as GMGPL!) and still served - GtkAda Sources, various versions, as distributed via anon CVS from libre. - Finally: The single files in all versions above which carry a GMGPL copyright header. If one where to strip all build mechanisms from the original GtkAda and just use the *.ads and *.adb files to build a new binding: Would that be GMGPL? The question still is: Was GtkAda ever under GMGPL? In which sense? What was the last GMGPL version (ACT doesn't document that very clearly). > I don't think he could have been any more explicit in his responce. So, He could have been more specific. > it seems GtkAga and everything coming from AdaCore is pure GPL or > commercial nowadays.. > (closely matching the Trolltech situation at the moment AFAICS). Only that Trolltech AFAIR has a linking exception for QT? > If anybody has any further questions I strongly suggest contacting > AdaCore directly and making another case to clean-up their sources.. I might just do that. I'll keep all informed. Regards -- Markus