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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,2acf1f37f6bdc5f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Licences References: <1129303351.767662.191580@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <80733$434fd8b0$49951a4$23477@ALLTEL.NET> <1129369145.676257.240480@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> From: Brian May Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 20:18:22 +1000 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZdAqkRi7oUSk+R5ftjq4+bRryXQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii NNTP-Posting-Host: snoopy.microcomaustralia.com.au X-Trace: news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com 1129371503 202.173.153.89 (15 Oct 2005 20:18:23 +1000) X-Complaints-To: abuse@pipenetworks.com X-Abuse-Info: Please forward all headers to enable your complaint to be properly processed. Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!news1.optus.net.au!optus!snewsf0.syd.ops.aspac.uu.net!news.netspace.net.au!news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com!not-for-mail Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5690 Date: 2005-10-15T20:18:22+10:00 List-Id: >>>>> "Steve" == Steve Whalen writes: Steve> I know of at least one programmer who wrote and sold a Steve> program after I got him interested in Ada via the GNAT Steve> compilers. That cannot happen anymore because a binary only Steve> program cannot be "sold" from the AdaCore GPL compiler (the Steve> program that was sold that I'm referring to here did NOT Steve> generate enough money to pay for an AdaCore support Steve> contract, though it did pay for a few presents for the wife Steve> to make up for late nights spent on the computer ). It Steve> is now much harder to get these kinds of Ada converts Steve> without a free Ada compiler. It would appear Adacore has forgotten the "proprietary programs written by individuals or small companies that cannot afford and do not want to pay for an expensive support contract" market. As well as open source programs that do not use a GPL compatible license (for any number of reasons - personally like others I like using current versions of GPL in my own code). I could understand this if Ada was more popular. In a way, the goal of the license is similar to the free version BitKeeper - free for open source but paid (at high rates geared at big projects IRC) for closed source software. At one time I believe the code was "open source" (but restrictive license). Then it changed to free binary + restrictive license. I think the situation has now changed, I don't think they support a free version anymore - lets hope Adacore doesn't revoke the free version in the same manner (I got the impression at LCA2005 that this was a bitter dispute with various parties throwing insults and accusations at each other - I think on the linux-kernel mailing lists). Fortunately, I believe in this case, FSF holds the copyright, so presumably Adacore can't restrict access any more then making it GPL. However, I think the people Adacore "forgot" will use the gcc gnat compiler now instead. This in turn hopefully will lead to my development with this compiler. I suspect the end result is that people will end up continuing to use the compiler they are most familiar with - even when the project justifies paying the $$$ for the Adacore supported compiler. -- Brian May