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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,776a7f0c329d226e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!proxad.net!freenix!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Amado Alves Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Isnt Gnat irrelevant ? ( was Re: Will the World ever seesomethingbeyond GNAT 3.15p?) Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:11:01 +0000 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: <87wtuhi6qk.fsf@deneb.enyo.de> <87u0pjq4cm.fsf@insalien.org> <87mzvbpr56.fsf@insalien.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1105791046 370 212.85.156.195 (15 Jan 2005 12:10:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 12:10:46 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jan 2005 12:10:31.0889 (UTC) FILETIME=[35C27C10:01C4FAFB] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7804 Date: 2005-01-15T12:11:01+00:00 Georg Bauhaus wrote: > Marius Amado Alves wrote: > : Nobody knows. > (= 1) > > : This is a legal conundrum > (= 2) > > :... IANAL > (= 3) > > : My additional point was that all open > : source is in similar chaos. > > I read this statement in the light of the difficulties of drawing a > consistent conclusion from 1, 2, and 3. Oh, please... > What you say is in insane chaos seems to work pretty well for companies with > big legal departments like IBM. But maybe IBM is in chaos? Maybe... > Compensation, if applicable, has not not been defined here, but discussed. > Has anyone seen a GAP contract? I have signed one. The gist of it is as I said: academic use only. (I'm not sure I can divulge the entire contract. I'll check eventually.)