Regarding the "TheOtherGCCBasedFortranCompiler" Wiki Page.

[Brooks Moses]

I recently had occasion to look at the GCC Wiki page on the g95 
compiler.  To be specific, I was hoping to point a recent poster towards 
an explanation of the difference between the two compilers.

Until I edited it just now, the bulk of the page consisted of a set of 
completely unsupported allegations regarding Andy Vaught's GPL 
violations, and a factually incorrect statement that releasing binaries 
compiled under g95 would cause the software to become Free Software [1].

As a result, it looks like an unprofessional perpetuation of a feud, 
rather than something appropriate to a professional organization, and it 
was not something I was comfortable providing a link to.

I have cleaned it up somewhat, by providing documentation of the 
substantiable claims of GPL violations (which are, honestly, a pretty 
minor subset of the ones alleged), and by correcting the statement 
regarding binaries compiled under g95.  I have also provided 
documentation as to why the remaining claims of GPL violation are 
erroneous, which I am leaving in place for now.

It is my opinion that this entire set of allegations and complaints 
should be removed entirely, and replaced by a very short, simple, and 
non-accusatory statement of why it was not possible to continue to 
include g95 as part of the GCC suite of compilers.  GFortran should 
present itself as a professional effort, and should be above this sort 
of petty bickering.

Thus, I'm submitting this for comments, as I feel that's more useful 
than my unilaterally clearing out large sections of the page without 
explanation.

- Brooks


[1] Yes, it "violates" the GPL license on the runtime library.  As per 
discussions on Groklaw and elsewhere, including GPL'ed code in your 
software does not "turn it into free software".  The GPL is a 
conditional license grant, nothing more.  If you release the software 
under non-free licenses, you are simply copying the included code 
without permission and thereby violating the copyright on it, and 
thereby liable for financial penalties to the copyright holder, as per 
normal copyright law.