Re: Why GPL for GNAT hurt(s) the Application Space

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

"G.B." <bauhaus@futureapps.invalid> writes:

> World views aside, and FUD aside, consider the lack of one
> conveniently installable package like AWS on Windows™ producing
> anger.

I will consider including AWS in the next Mac OS X release; but there
seem to be quite a lot of user-specific choices (LDAP? (which) SSL?), so
perhaps it's not a good idea. It takes about 5 minutes to build.

That was the GPL 2014 distro, which is of course pure GPL. Is the source
from the git repo pure GPL?

> Also, on Windows™, GCC is not perceived to be native if it sits
> on top of Cygwin or MingW. These and Windows™ itself require
> licensing issues.

I think it uses mingw (whose licensing terms are very open -
MIT-like). A program that used the cygwin libraries would have to be
GPL.

Not sure the users need install mingw themselves? (I mean, it could be
included in a .msi if someone were to produce one, so long as the mingw
licensing notice was included).

Windows licensing issues?