harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dan Lydick" <dlyd...@earthlink.net>
Subject Re: [arch] How much of java.* and friends does Harmony need towrite. Was: VM/Classlibrary interface
Date Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT


> [Original Message]
> From: Sven de Marothy <sven@physto.se>
> To: <harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org>
 > Date: 6/4/05 3:49:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [arch] How much of java.* and friends does Harmony need
towrite.  Was: VM/Classlibrary interface
>
> On Sat, 2005-06-04 at 21:44 +0200, Santiago Gala wrote:
> > > So why create flexibility when there aren't
> > > options?
> > 
> > to enable the development of other options?
> > without arriving to flexibility syndrome, good interfaces enable
> > competing implementations.
> 
> If you're going to go off and write your own class library, implementing
> the VM-specific parts is the least of your problems.
> 
> > Your question has exactly the same mindset that Sun people's comments:
"Java is free
> > enough, you have our implementation for free, why do you want another
> > one?" :-)
> 
> No, it isn't the same mindset at all, because I can give you a specific
> list of grievances I have with the Sun license. But nobody here seems to
> be able to give list any specific problems with the GNU Classpath VM
> interface other than "It's not ours.".

So if it's available, let Geir and co. keep working on
any legalities with FSF for using it to the max.  That's
what they wrote it for, and I'm all for investigating its
potential.


> 
> /Sven
> 



Dan Lydick




Mime
View raw message