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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Precisely why can't official FSF GNAT maintainers copy bug fixes
 in GNAT & its GCC-contained runtime en masse from GNAT GPL Community Edition?
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:35:40 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <pchk2s$co5$1@dont-email.me>
References: <9c3a75d6-a01f-4cfa-9493-10b8b082ead8@googlegroups.com>
 <114db2c4-1e8c-4506-8d7c-df955dd9f808@googlegroups.com>
 <87d0yc1lsq.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <a181b4df-ceec-4d3e-8669-19ee8f268e56@googlegroups.com>
 <878t901jp4.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <bb2cbfdf-abb3-4b59-9ded-ce27bb98144b@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 12:35:40 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="befab12968f6e5b596caf3305e86d3c4";
	logging-data="13061"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+7HCjQYw1BlAwvyFTewHpAaqL3IxgEu+g="
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (VMS/Multinet)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:41j9Vl3G8bihyy2WvwDPYmZBxEw=
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:51968
Date: 2018-05-04T12:35:40+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2018-05-03, Dan'l Miller <optikos@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 3, 2018 at 5:02:52 PM UTC-5, Paul Rubin wrote:
>> The runtime exception still applies to the version that FSF got.
>
> What FSF got was irrevocable assignment of all ownership.  The content of
> the files doesn't matter to the owner of the legal rights to that content. 
> As assignee, FSF owns the content of those rights-assigned files no matter
> what the assigner legitimately put into them as work for hire.

There are two code bases; the AdaCore one and the FSF one.

The FSF assignment controls the FSF code base only.

Someone in AdaCore who is authorised to do so has to decide to push
code from the AdaCore code base into the FSF code base.

At this point, and _only_ at this point, do the FSF have control
rights to this pushed code.

In particular, the FSF cannot just pull code from the AdaCore code base
and re-licence it under the terms of the FSF codebase without the
permission of AdaCore. AdaCore have to push code into the FSF code base.

This is my understanding of the situation and I have never seen
anything which contradicts this.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world