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,d0f6c37e3c1b712a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada in Debian: most libraries will switch to the pure GPL in Etch References: <1151405920.523542.137920@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com> <1151422118.772405.307200@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <87ac7ypaaa.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> From: M E Leypold Date: 28 Jun 2006 15:31:22 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.226.55 X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1151501106 88.72.226.55 (28 Jun 2006 15:25:06 +0200) X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed0.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5279 Date: 2006-06-28T15:31:22+02:00 List-Id: "Dr. Adrian Wrigley" writes: > The strange thing is that nobody seems to benefit from the changes > and the consequent FUD :( Exactly. I still wonder why AdaCore doesn't speak up clearly, saying when the license change occurred, letting the old versions under GMGPL (even if they now come from their site). Yes, there is a certain probability of a community supported version arising. It won't hurt them, since I don't think those wanting to buy Gnat Pro support would really want a community supported version (read: slowly maintained, no support on demand, no new Gtk features) anyway. My guess would be that they actually forgot the anon cvs and forgot to strip the linking excaption there and are now entrenching themselves in a probably untenable legal theory that (a) the license notices in the files have no meaning whatsoever and (b) everything is GPL now, even the old versions, because they don't want anyone to become wise on that and just compile himself GtkAda from the CVS source to get a GMGPL library. (IANAL). I'd wish that a really big player would do exactly that. It'd be against the spririt of free software (I usually try even to get the authors agreement if I'm mirroring sources from their distribution sites) and an act of blatant and arrogant highway robbery, but it would be a sort of just punishment. That wont happen, I know, but one can dream. (I bet it would happen if I forgot to put my license notices right). Looking at the CVS I tend to think that even the 2.8.x source should still be GMGPL mostly. But IANAL. Regards -- Markus