Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 73736 invoked from network); 9 May 2005 14:42:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 May 2005 14:42:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 73921 invoked by uid 500); 9 May 2005 14:42:36 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 73385 invoked by uid 500); 9 May 2005 14:42:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 73230 invoked by uid 99); 9 May 2005 14:42:30 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from wildebeest.demon.nl (HELO gnu.wildebeest.org) (83.160.152.237) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Mon, 09 May 2005 07:42:30 -0700 Received: from elsschot.wildebeest.org ([192.168.1.26]) by gnu.wildebeest.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1DV9P7-0001u4-00 for ; Mon, 09 May 2005 16:38:41 +0200 Subject: Re: Harmony: project purpose From: Mark Wielaard To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org In-Reply-To: <20050508151306.64141.qmail@web60619.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050508151306.64141.qmail@web60619.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-kq5UCCBodxiMjzqU2O2l" Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 16:40:06 +0200 Message-Id: <1115649606.21639.397.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --=-kq5UCCBodxiMjzqU2O2l Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Steve, On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 08:13 -0700, Steven Augart wrote: > This is ideal. I was concerned that we'd be building a new set of > APL-licensed libraries from scratch, after the hard work we've put into > GNU Classpath. And thanks for your contributions to it! It seems most people involved are convinced that building something around the GNU Classpath core libraries and runtime/compiler interfaces is a sane idea. This is however a group discussion, so maybe someone will come up with some other plan. We will have to wait and see. > Just to confirm: you're saying that the GNU Classpath project will be > relicensing the existing GNU Classpath code base with some sort of > MPL-style license that is GPL and APL compatible. Have I understood > correctly? No. I got some feedback on-list and off-list that there is no need for that. The current exception statement to the GPL used by GNU Classpath is compatible with and acceptable to the Apache community. But the FSF did say that IF the exception statement was in any way unclear THEN they would certainly be willing to clarify it so that there was no obstacle for adoption of GNU Classpath. There currently doesn't seem any need to do this though. Cheers, Mark --=20 Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/ --=-kq5UCCBodxiMjzqU2O2l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCf3ZGxVhZCJWr9QwRAigYAJ9dGaQqBTrO9pFPSE6q8ZdkdfUO9gCeIi62 QUifpyyPMmeO1ihB9Dwyfvg= =99zP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-kq5UCCBodxiMjzqU2O2l--