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!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad.highwinds-media.com!fx30.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Hubert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What exactly is the licensing situation with GNAT? References: <87fvdr2vdv.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk> <54609F34.4080201@spam.spam> <35f01472-3510-4f67-8765-006fa8591c35@googlegroups.com> <9tc8w.73007$ZT5.37595@fx07.iad> <22a3816a-4e89-48f0-a126-dce581781beb@googlegroups.com> <084b1934-9641-425e-85ec-293e0334413e@googlegroups.com> <86bf69c8-eb08-4696-b6c9-3784f5c42213@googlegroups.com> <1415776387.7960.41.camel@obry.net> In-Reply-To: <1415776387.7960.41.camel@obry.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 141111-4, 11/11/2014), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 07:47:34 UTC Organization: http://www.NewsDemon.com Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 23:47:39 -0800 X-Received-Bytes: 2862 X-Received-Body-CRC: 381146007 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:23139 Date: 2014-11-11T23:47:39-08:00 List-Id: > Well another point of view is that it encourage Open Source softwares. > And after all we all know that we can sell Open Source software. The > only requirement is to make available the sources if someone ask for > them when you sell the software. > > I bet this is in fact no big deal for many applications. > That is basically correct. Of course it depends on the situation. Fir instance, I licensed a 3D graphics engine some 2 years ago. It cost about 500$ at the time. You would get the complete source code with it. However the variable names were so cryptic, and there were absolutely no comments in the source code, I mean zero, nada, I have never ever seen such a void in my life. I believe the developer was using a tool to remove all comments before he gave out the source. The effect was really that you could hardly use the code to do anything like fixing a problem or adding a feature. Analyzing the source, say to write your own engine would be a complete waste of time. So I guess handing out the source code is not the terrible thing that closed source developer might think it is. I am thinking about releasing the source of our game client too in the future (it's in C++) so that maybe people can develop their own client based on it. But of course I would never give out the code to the server part since that's where the money is generated. --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com