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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,13b7917466f2d19 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-12-05 12:58:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: Ronald Cole Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: GNAT and GCC 3.0 Date: 05 Dec 2001 12:58:00 -0800 Organization: Forte International Technical Consulting Services - +1 760 499 9142 Message-ID: Sender: ronald@yakisoba.forte-intl.com References: <9a575af3.0110020747.2304ce86@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0110022002.7ccde025@posting.google.com> <5ee5b646.0110060639.31567261@posting.google.com> <9pr6e8$aai1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <%biw7.8780$H81.3054034106@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com> <5ee5b646.0110092211.a69a5f@posting.google.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17470 Date: 2001-12-05T12:58:00-08:00 List-Id: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > In article , Ronald Cole writes: > > dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) writes: > >> This is a fabrication. No such "threat" was made at any > >> time to any of our customers. We are not in the business > >> of threatening customers. This is simply a fantasy that > >> Mr. Cole has constructed (for what reasons I do not know). > > > > I still have our email discussion between you, me and rms from June > > 1997 where you clearly state that you considered having wavefront > > sources out in the public to be so dangerious that you would seriously > > consider not giving wavefront releases to customers who were > > exercising their GPL rights and giving them to me. You specifically > > used the example of Stallman getting steamed that a Linux distribution > > released an internal version of gcc that he didn't intend for public > > consumption to support your position. > > So who was the customer who was "threatened" ? RMS ? Read it for yourself: Specifically, Mr. Dewar said: "If people started distributing wavefront versions freely, then w [sic] would probably reluctantly decide to stop making them available, since it would be clear that their distribution was harmful. That would be too bad for the cases where they really solve a problem." Since wavefronts were/are only sent to customers of ACT, it's not too hard to figure out that this was a veiled threat to them about exercising their right under the GPL to send me copies. -- Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412 Ronald Cole Phone: (760) 499-9142 President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152 My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B