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!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!news.nask.pl!news.nask.org.pl!newsfeed.pionier.net.pl!pwr.wroc.pl!news.wcss.wroc.pl!not-for-mail From: antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl 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 19:53:03 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Politechnika Wroclawska Message-ID: References: <9c3a75d6-a01f-4cfa-9493-10b8b082ead8@googlegroups.com> <114db2c4-1e8c-4506-8d7c-df955dd9f808@googlegroups.com> <87d0yc1lsq.fsf@nightsong.com> <878t901jp4.fsf@nightsong.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: hera.math.uni.wroc.pl X-Trace: z-news.wcss.wroc.pl 1525463583 17485 156.17.86.1 (4 May 2018 19:53:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.pwr.wroc.pl NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 19:53:03 +0000 (UTC) Cancel-Lock: sha1:cjhThm9z21rtVFkbLTefwsLDEos= User-Agent: tin/2.4.1-20161224 ("Daill") (UNIX) (Linux/4.15.0 (x86_64)) Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:51987 Date: 2018-05-04T19:53:03+00:00 List-Id: Dan'l Miller wrote: > On Thursday, May 3, 2018 at 5:02:52 PM UTC-5, Paul Rubin wrote: > > "Dan'l Miller" writes: > > > But the rights to copy have already been irrevocably ?assigned? to FSF, > > > > Do you know the terms of the assignment contract? > > ?When a group at NYU developed the GNU Ada Compiler, with funding from the US Air Force, the contract explicitly called for donating the resulting code to the Free Software Foundation.? > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/university.html > > It is only a matter of effort to find that US Air Force contract in the public records of the federal government. > > Here is some prior(-to-now) edition of the assignment contract: > http://www.dreamsongs.com/IHE/IHE-110.html > > This is the process, specifying the content of the assignment contract: > https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Papers.html > > pertinent commentary on it: > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-assign.en.html > > > >> Anyway, when you > > > ?you? = AdaCore here? > > > > No, "you" = Dan'l Miller, > > No, I am not an official maintainer of FSF GNAT. I speak only of official maintainers of FSF GNAT. Quit casting aspersions on my personal asparagus. I am merely a passive observer, a spectator, chewing popcorn, sitting in my seat in the audience. > > > > Remember, wasn't AdaCore the party who removed the FSF's Runtime > > > Exception via a script ?after? AdaCore irrevocably assigning the > > > source code to FSF? > > > > 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. I think you have big misunderstanding how copyright works. FSF got files at some specific time (in particular due to initial assignment). Changes to those file also are covered by copyright, you can distribute changed files only by agreement of _all_ copyright owners, in this case Ada Core(additions) and FSF (base version). Do not be fooled by copyright statements in files: copyright exists even if there is no explicit statement in files. And changing copyright notices is extra work (and it interrupts normal software workflow) so Ada Core used to have wrong copyright notices. Robert Dewar (who IIUC has law degree) claimed that copyright notices does not matter, but at some moment Ada Core decided to put correct license condition into files. I guess that they decided to give misleading statement about ownership as this does not cause serious problems. Concerning FSF, I think that they know what Ada Core is doing and accept that. I personaly think that Ada Core is subverting GPL, but apparently FSF either thinks that what Ada Core is doing is right or decided to compromise to have a contributor. Note that without paying customers Ada Core would get out of business and Ada Core thinks that it needs licence restrictions to get enough money. So sticking to GPL spirit as I see it probably would mean no GNAT in the future or at least stagnation (adapting GNAT to GCC backend is a continuous effort that would put significant load on volunteer maintainers). -- Waldek Hebisch