[gtkada] License question

[Jeff Creem]

Stefan Bellon wrote:
>
>   
>> 2) It promotes 'free' software.
>> 3) Releasing as GMGPL only helps AdaCore customers (since only they
>> can really exercise the right). By releasing bindings as pure GPL
>> that AdaCore may want/need to release a similar products  of in the
>> future you get to create some FUD and confusion about the license
>> and copyright ownership of any of these similar bindings. That seems
>> like a good thing.
>>     
>
> This sounds a bit like anti-AdaCore attitude and does not really help.
>
> You can as well look at it from the other point of view: If he released
> the whole of CairoAda under pure GPL (which is not at discussion right
> now, if I understand correctly, but just the Gdk and RSVG part), then
> AdaCore customers were not able to use his work

It is not anti AdaCore any more than their decision to change the 
license on the publicly available version from GMGPL to GPL was anti non 
'free' SW purist developer. (And to be clear, as I stated in the past, 
they were/are well within their rights to do what they did). The dual 
license model they selected is based on a business decision and AdaCore 
has every right (and if publicly traded, responsibility) to maximize 
profit in an ethical manner and certainly the license change is ethical.

I am just pointing out that as a developer from the outside when acting 
in a role that is not as an AdaCore customer, if the current license 
situation of freely available AdaCore software is not to your liking 
then putting yourself in a position where you feel as if you are 
exposing yourself to legal risk (whether you are or are not actually 
doing so) only to help AdaCore does not really make a lot of sense. In 
the end of course because AdaCore gives so much more to the community 
than we give back it is is really an empty gesture....but it is a 
reasonable option.