Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <42A54296.9010903@realityforge.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:45:42 +1000
From: Peter Donald <peter@realityforge.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: The Classpath VM interface. (Please read)
References: <1118082599.20853.36.camel@qcplx01.physto.se>
	 <42A5083C.5070302@realityforge.org>
 <1118115514.2898.33.camel@qcplx01.physto.se>
In-Reply-To: <1118115514.2898.33.camel@qcplx01.physto.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Sven de Marothy wrote:

>If you have downloaded Harmony, which intends to be a full JDK including 
>a VM and class library, why would you want to be able to use that with the 
>class library from a different JDK? 
>  
>
In "[arch] VM Interface" on "6/06/2005 10:32 AM" I wrote

"I assume that if the Harmony JVM gets half as good as is hoped
there will be companys who want to adopt the JVM but continue
to use Suns class library so that differences in libraries don't hurt
their customers."

>Disregarding the illegality of distributing such a combo, 
>
I am not sure why it would be illegal if someone like IBM were to use the
Harmony JVM but use Suns class library. Actually I think that this use case
is one of the aims of the project.

>there is no good 
>practical reason for wanting that either.
>  
>
I think we will have to agree to disagree about that point.

--
Cheers,

Peter Donald
"The first duty of a revolutionary is to get
      away with it." - Abbie Hoffman