Re: Ada in Debian: most libraries will switch to the pure GPL in Etch

[M E Leypold <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>]

Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:

> On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 22:23 +0200, Michael Bode wrote:
> 
> >  I
> > claim that a sudden, secret and maybe retroactive (or maybe it was
> > between 2.4.0 and 2.4.1?, AdaCore won't tell us) change of license
> > happend to GtkAda. And if that happens once ...
> > 
> > Regarding messages from AdaCore to the contrary of anything:
> > 
> > http://web.archive.org/web/20050224092046/http://libre.act-europe.fr/GtkAda/
> > 
> 
> Ludovic lets us know a response from AdaCore that uses the _present_
> tense,
> 
> - All software downloaded from AdaCore is pure GPL, no matter what the
>   headers say.
> 
> I don't think that _if_ there was a legal status at a time in the
> recent past, this status can be declared something different.

Fine. Problem is the amnesia presently ravaging ACT headquarters. They
don't remember the past or don't talk about it. It certainly would be
going out on a limb if anyone distributes GtkAda 2.4.0 (from old
libre) now as GMGPL which is exactly the same version as 2.4.0
deistributed from ACT today which is GPL and relies on his/her memory
only regarding the license the thing had when it was downloaded. After
all, the licensing statements in the tarball itself are far from clear
(which started all that hullabaloo in the very beginning).


> These things should happen only after one legal system has been
> dropped in favor of another, for example after a war.  I am aware
> that many of the software packages used to be advertised as being
> GMGPL.

Well. Can I call you as witness? Will that suffice? -- You see my
point.


> With Debian in particular, I think there might be more issues, like
> you don't want to stress your good relations with AdaCore, if any,

That certainly seems to be on of the factors in a number of cases.

> if you are maintaining Debian Ada software that nowadays is mostly
> produced by AdaCore.

> This, I guess, is just a business issue for some who are involved.

Which perhaps should cut both ways. ACTs distributions never installed
flawlessly in a give system, so they should be _very_ grateful for the
work of debian maintainers which are doing a lot of free advertisment
for ACT by providing well maintained no-hassle installations of ACTs
public versions.


> Yet, what about a collaborative effort to produce good general
> purpose Ada libraries to be used in Ada programs,
> irrespective of the compiler. Hm. A PAL with funding from everyone
> involved, including compiler makers and their customers.
> We've all got to make a living, haven't we?

I would participate, but not if I can't sell a closed programm now and
then (or at least assure the customer that I am allowed to sign away
my rights to him). But I don't suppose you'd want GMGPL libraries, would you?

Regards -- Markus