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: 103376,3e26dfa741e64e5f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.kolumbus.fi!newsfeed1.funet.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!uio.no!ntnu.no!randhol
From: randhol@bacchus.pvv.ntnu.no (Preben Randhol)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GNAT GPL 2005 Edition is now available
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 07:56:14 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Norwegian university of science and technology
Message-ID: <slrndj24gu.oqn.randhol@bacchus.pvv.ntnu.no>
References: <1126875543.239666.325290@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <bFCWe.24901$QB2.5887@reader1.news.jippii.net>
 <3467d$432b0af1$49956f8$22115@ALLTEL.NET>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bacchus.pvv.ntnu.no
X-Trace: orkan.itea.ntnu.no 1127289374 6305 129.241.210.178 (21 Sep 2005
 07:56:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@itea.ntnu.no
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 07:56:14 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.2 (FreeBSD)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4980
Date: 2005-09-21T07:56:14+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <3467d$432b0af1$49956f8$22115@ALLTEL.NET>, Marc A. Criley wrote:
>I think there are two motivations at work here.  One is the Stallman/FSF 
>philosophy of Free (libre) software, as licensed by the GPL.  The other, 
>here in this newsgroup anyway, is Ada advocacy.
>
>Now I'm all for the GPL, I wish all the software in the world was under 
>the GPL.  But it isn't, and truth be told, of the multi-billion dollar 
>software industry very little of that software is GPLed.  (I don't want 
>to haggle over the percentage, but think about this:  what is the nature 
>of the licensing of most of the software that most businesses, your 
>friends, and family are using?  And where are they getting it?  I doubt 
>it's GPL, and I doubt they're downloading it from CVS repositories.)
>
>So if you want to market a software product, you have to go to where the 
>money is, and that means customers with proprietary concerns.
>
>Trying to sell them a software tool or utility, or give it to them and 
>sell support, that would force them to GPL their own code is just going 
>to be a non-starter in an overwhelming number of instances.
>
>So if you want to sell them an Ada tool, to enhance or encourage a 
>customer company's use of Ada, the last thing you want to do is tell 
>them they have to change or set the licensing of their products to be 
>GPL compatible.  They're not going to do that, so they're not going to 
>gain the advantages of your product, and so why bother with Ada anyway 
>any more, since Visual Studio C++ or C# or Java doesn't force them to do 
>anything like that?
>
>GPL-GNAT appears to be promoting the Free agenda over the Ada advocacy 
>agenda, which is the problem the OMSs (One-Man-Shops) here are having 
>with it.  It's hard enough selling just Ada, without also having to sell 
>the GPL to commercial, proprietary companies.

Yes, I agree 100%.

By the way if one has contributed patches for GtkAda does one have to be
consulted before a license change or can FSF/Adacore just change the
license from GMGPL to GPL?

Preben who has not been able to check comp.lang.ada lately and is
possibly a bit late in the debate...