From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_20,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a37:a8c9:: with SMTP id r192mr20181758qke.467.1593544356603; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:12:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3ac:: with SMTP id f41mr12629398otf.5.1593544356150; Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:12:36 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:12:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <471e2c4a-192f-443d-8247-c06d56ab2092o@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.233.35; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.233.35 References: <4d9fa282-830d-42f7-a3bf-ba127cb2ad06o@googlegroups.com> <8332f305-299f-45d7-9f9d-2cad924b24d8o@googlegroups.com> <9d941aca-2eb6-4f35-a346-c290c4666bdfo@googlegroups.com> <76def2a5-667c-4009-b3b9-f0cf1c13a51bo@googlegroups.com> <3b5b2360-684c-4149-8662-98b53319cf94o@googlegroups.com> <471e2c4a-192f-443d-8247-c06d56ab2092o@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <9ea97f89-8912-4c59-a1c2-2aa71107902do@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Ada on Apple's new procesors From: Optikos Injection-Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2020 19:12:36 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:59269 List-Id: On Tuesday, June 30, 2020 at 9:59:58 AM UTC-5, cha...@adacore.com wrote: > > > By the way the reason I haven't answered other messages is mainly bec= ause I am not familiar with Apple's specific constraints here, so I'd rathe= r not make any statement about them rather than making wrong statements and= you shouldn't draw any conclusion from the fact that I haven't replied to = some of the messages in this thread. > >=20 > > Fine, but surely AdaCore has access to a legal department? >=20 > Yes, and this legal department is busy processing customer requests, it c= an't process requests coming from e.g. c.l.a >=20 > Arno Then perhaps this thread's Narrow versus Wide 2 legal theories should be tr= anscribed into a GitHub issue at https://github.com/AdaCore/gnat-llvm/issue= s so that when/if GNAT-LLVM is to ever leave its current =E2=80=9Cexperimen= tal=E2=80=9D state of being =E2=80=9Ca work-in-progress research project th= at's not meant for and shouldn't be used for industrial purposes [that i]s = meant to show the feasibility of generating LLVM =E2=80=A2bitcode=E2=80=A2 = for Ada=E2=80=9D (emphasis added, as quoted from GNAT-LLVM repository's mai= n page at GitHub). At the point that GNAT-LLVM is no longer to be deemed e= xperimental, there should have been a long-standing open (!) (not closed!) = issue that reminds AdaCore's legal department to tie up this loose end, eve= n if that is years from now. By that point, there should be a strong track= record of technical knowledge regarding Apple's bitcode submission policie= s to the App Store to relay to the attorneys so that they can simply turn t= he legal crank to make a decision/adjustments of whether/how GNAT-LLVM is t= o transition out of experimental status. Also by that point, (despite RMS'= s own distance nowadays) there might even be more legal precedent/statement= from at least one member of the set {FSF, Software Freedom Conservancy, So= ftware Freedom Law Center} regarding the RLE's true meaning of IR vis a vis= assembly-language-esque IR that could be applicable to GNAT-LLVM's emissio= n of LLVM IR, textual or bitcode (and perhaps to JVM bytecode and perhaps t= o Microsoft CIL). It seems that it would be the executives at AdaCore and/= or FSF in consultation with their legal teams at that time (i.e., when this= proposed GitHub issue gets worked) who would make that final wise/well-inf= ormed decision and/or those wise/well-informed adjustments=E2=80=94not engi= neers or mid-level managers who might post to c.l.a. Is there a green light to submit such an issue at https://github.com/AdaCor= e/gnat-llvm/issues as described above?