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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,XPRIO autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,6d608a86e65c95d,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-04-05 08:42:05 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!btnet-peer!btnet!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!gxn.net!server6.netnews.ja.net!server4.netnews.ja.net!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news6-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "chris.danx" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Ada Stuff and some confusion X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 16:36:03 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.253.8.47 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news6-win.server.ntlworld.com 986484947 62.253.8.47 (Thu, 05 Apr 2001 16:35:47 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 16:35:47 BST Organization: ntlworld News Service Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:6511 Date: 2001-04-05T16:36:03+01:00 List-Id: Hi, I am writing some Ada examples for my new web page. It will consist of a few examples of things I've found difficult in the past and which a lot of people in this group have helped me with. (Thanks to all again). Things like Streams for file IO, modular type usage, exception handling, and tons more I've learned from you guys. Now I need you're help again with a general programming question. I'm confused as to the difference between 'declaration' and 'definition'. I remember reading somewhere that many computer programmers don't know or confuse them. I also don't want to put up inaccurate stuff up on the web, and proliferate the wrong definitions and add to the situation. I also want to know about my Ada sources and licensing. I use GNAT at the minute (I don't expect this to change until I win the lottery, and even then I doubt I'll change. It's the best compiler I've used, ever!). My question is to do with GPL. I don't really understand it. I think it means that any software I write with it must also be GPL'ed (or LGPL'ed). Now I have two questions about this. Can I just put a comment in the source, at the top in flashing lights, "this source is licensed under GPL, see license.txt for further details" or do I have to include the license in the source. My second question is can I ditch the license and go with my own. I don't really have a problem with making it GPL'ed, but i do find the license too wordy in a technical sense. What about this? THESE SOURCES ARE PROVIDED AS IS ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE AUTHOR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENCES DIRECTLY OR UNDIRECTLY FROM THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE. THE AUTHOR GIVES HIS OR HER PERMISSION THAT THESE SOURCES MAY BE ALTERED PROVIDING ALL CHANGES ARE CLEARLY MARKED AND ATTRIBUTED TO THE PERSON WHO MADE THOSE CHANGES. THE AUTHOR OF THOSE CHANGES MUST AGREE TO THIS LICENSE AND SHOULD NOT ALTER THE LICENSE IN ANY WAY. THIS SOFTWARE IS NOT MEANT FOR USE IN A SAFETY CRITICAL SYSTEM OR ANY SYSTEM REQUIRING ASSURANCES OF SOFTWARE RELIABILITY. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THESE CONDITIONS DO NOT USE THIS SOFTWARE. IF YOU VIOLATE ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS THE AUTHOR RESERVES THE RITE TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST YOU IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF YOUR COUNTRY SHOULD THE AUTHORS NAME BE BROUGHT INTO DISREPUTE THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS. THE AUTHOR DISTRIBUTES THESE SOURCES IN THE HOPE THEY MAY BE USEFUL. This is just off the top of my head. Sounds GPLish but clearer i think. What do you think? I'm going to have to change it slightly or make a second version for OS writing i think. Don't know if this would be legally binding. Thanks, Chris Campbell