RE: ADCL

["Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." <rleif@rleif.com>]

From: Bob Leif
To: Al Christians et al.
----------------------------------------
From: the ADA DEVELOPERS COOPERATIVE LICENSE (Draft), Version 0.3 by Robert
C. Leif
"??" means these numbers are my first guess.

Section 4.3. The measurement of software units will by a tool based on the
Ada Semantic Interface Specification. This tool will measure (Linked Lines
of Source Text or Feature Points ??) with the complexity term based on Ada
semantics.

1.26. "Feature Points" means a super set of function points which was
defined by the Software Productivity Research, Inc. in 1986, as cited in
What Are Function Points? by Capers Jones, Chairman, Software Productivity
Research, Inc. (http://www.spr.com/library/0funcmet.htm. Last visited 29
October, 1998. Feature Points add the number of algorithms to the parameters
employed to measure Function Points.

1.27. "Original Lines of Source Text" means a unit of software which is
defined as the total number of semicolons (';') minus the sum of
) the semicolons contained within comments.
) 0.75?? times the semicolons contained in renaming declarations.
) 0.75?? times  the semicolons contained in subtype declarations which do
not include a range.

1.28. "Linked Lines of Source Text" means a unit of software which is
defined as the total number of semicolons which would be actually used in
the linked Executable if
) all loop structures remained intact (no unrolling);
) all instantiations of generics are treated as the equivalent of the source
text which would have been created without the use of the generic;
) all instances of inherited subprograms of tagged types are treated as the
equivalent of the source text which would have been created without the use
of the tagged type.
--------------------------------
Lines of code is a crude approximation to get us going.

R. C. Leif, "Ada Developers Cooperative License (Draft) Version 0.3", Ada
letters XIX, No 1 pp. 97-107 (1999).

-----Original Message-----
From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
[mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org]On Behalf Of Al Christians
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 8:35 AM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Re: ADCL


"Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." wrote:
>
> Of course, I agree. There are several interesting differences between
> software and other copyrightable items. Object-oriented design and
> large libraries can result in a product using only a small amount of
> a developer's creation. The royalties should be based on what is
> linked. Run-time binding is beyond me.

As royalties that depend on how smart the linker is are beyond my ken.

The simplest would be for the author to puplich a flat $ amount per copy
for commercial use instead of the percent based on SLOC.  Do you really
want me to just pad my SLOC count to reduce your royalty?  This public
license with fixed royalty per copy works for music.  With a license
offering based on flat fee per copy sold, the author can at least take a
guess at how much advantage his package offers in comparison to whatever
the competition (commercial, free, write it myself) is, and a whole
lot of complicated math and what-if questions are cleanly avoided.

The idea (that Ada promoters should promote, I think) is that software
parts should to embody the same positive qualities that work for
hardware parts (in reliability, in buy-vs-build comparisons, and in
ease of interconnection), and pricing  accordingly would strengthen that
perception.


Al