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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c9ea66d3dcd0bfcf
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-04-28 03:16:48 PST
Path: 
 newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.168!uninett.no!ntnu.no!randhol+abuse
From: randhol+abuse@pvv.org (Preben Randhol)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] XML/Ada 0.5 released
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 10:16:47 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology
Message-ID: <slrn9el67g.lo.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
References: <l8wv87df9y.fsf@berlin.int.act-europe.fr>
 <mailman.988307480.28843.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <slrn9eibsn.1on.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <GVeG6.712$SZ5.57400@www.newsranger.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: tyfon.itea.ntnu.no 988453007 11134 129.241.83.82 (28 Apr 2001
 10:16:47 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 10:16:47 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.0 (Linux)
Xref: newsfeed.google.com comp.lang.ada:7015
Date: 2001-04-28T10:16:47+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 13:57:58 GMT, Ted Dennison wrote:
>>If it is a library isn't LGPL better?
> V
> I don't think its that kind of library. The LGPL works best with
> run-time libraries (libxx.so, xx.dll, etc.); the kind of stuff that it
> makes sense to distribute separately in binary form. Many of the
> provisions in it make no sense outside of that context. Some of them
> are actively harmful. For instance, if I want to make a traditional
> closed-source Windows program and sell it to someone, I have to also
> give them a compiler and my sources so that they can compile new
> versions of the library when it is released. If it were a proper
> Windows DLL, they'd only need the compiler. :-)

Ah. I see. I was thinking of XmlAda as a library. :-) As to
restictiveness I understand it is GPL > LGPL > GMGPL.

Personally I'm very happy that XmlAda is released publicly, GPL is
enough for my needs at the moment. And if you want to make a software
product you can use the GPL, though you don't have to release it
publically just to paying customers, although they can pass it on I
guess if they want to :-) GPL doesn't force you to release...

-- 
Preben Randhol ------------------- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/ --
                 �For me, Ada95 puts back the joy in programming.�