comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Leake <stephen_leake@acm.org>
To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org
Subject: Re: Questions about Ada Core Technologies
Date: 07 Apr 2004 22:37:20 -0400
Date: 2004-04-07T22:37:20-04:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <mailman.212.1081391850.327.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <plsmfffgur.fsf@sparre.crs4.it>

Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk> writes:

> Stephen Leake wrote:
> 
> > So even if ACT was requesting that customers do not distribute
> > non-public releases, it would not be violating the GPL
> 
> Ignoring the difference between "requesting" and "requiring", it
> _would_ be a violation of the GNU GPL, since the GNU GPL allows people
> to redistribute binaries (as long as they also redistribute the
> corresponding source code).

Hmm. You didn't quote my full post, so you've lost the definition of
"it" that we  are discussing here. Here is the original statement:

> - Does ACT request that customers not distribute copies of GNAT Pro?

Hmm. Your question caused me to go re-read the GPL. Here's the
relevant paragraphs:

 1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
    source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
    conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an
    appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep
    intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the
    absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the
    Program a copy of this License along with the Program.

 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
    under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms
    of Sections 1 and 2 above provided ...

That does indeed say that if you have a copy of the binary or source,
you may distribute it. Note that it does _not_ say you _must_
distribute it, which some people seem to think, sometimes.

So I stand corrected; ACT may not _require_ that customers not give
copies of GNAT to anyone. However, they may _request_ it, for the "not
ready to distribute" reason I gave.

> But since FSF and ACT seem to be on friendly terms, I doubt that ACT
> is doing anything that isn't completely by the book, when it comes
> to GNU GPL.

Right. As I said, there is nothing in the customer contract with ACT
about not distributing GNAT. But they do informally request it.

-- 
-- Stephe




  reply	other threads:[~2004-04-08  2:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-04-06 21:52 Questions about Ada Core Technologies Ludovic Brenta
2004-04-07  3:22 ` Stephen Leake
2004-04-08  0:33   ` Jacob Sparre Andersen
2004-04-08  2:37     ` Stephen Leake [this message]
2004-04-13 20:54       ` Robert I. Eachus
2004-04-14  8:57         ` Peter Hermann
2004-04-14 13:56           ` Robert I. Eachus
2004-04-07  4:38 ` Steve
2004-04-07 15:27 ` Florian Weimer
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox