Re: Will the defect with formal package parameters be fixed in GNAT GPL 2009?

[Robert Matthews <ignored@ramatthews.free-online.co.uk>]

Eric Hughes wrote:


> These days, not supporting the free software penumbra around a
> platform is a recipe for slow failure. I've been in the position of
> making platform selection and hiring a new programming team. There are
> always a number of platforms that are more-or-less adequate and the
> dominant factor in selecting one becomes availability of staff
> competent in that platform. Without a free software environment for
> people to self-train with, the number of available staff decreases.
> For a language, like Ada, that's not ordinarily part of university
> curriculum, such an environment can be the dominant mode of training.
> Platforms are in _de facto_ competition for the attention of
> programmers/potential-staff. The population dynamics for a platform
> that treats its free software people with disdain is pretty clear--it
> will decline.
> 
> Peter Drucker made the excellent point that if you want to improve
> your sales, you should talk to your non-customers about why they don't
> buy (rather than the ordinary practice of talking to your customers
> about why they do). So here I am, a non-customer, as it were, of the
> Ada platform. My advice is that listening is a more productive
> response than blaming.

For us GPL-Ada people it seems that AdaCore is both our greatest
asset (via GNAT and related tools), and also our greatest problem.
I was greatly disappointed when I realized that AdaCore do not
coordinate their GPL releases with Ludovic. Also, I can remember
when Robert Dewar stated on cla that AdaCore generally ignore
bug reports from the GPL community.
For me, the ideal would be for AdaCore to coordinate their GPL
releases with the Ubuntu releases; I live in hope.

Robert