Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2000 15:19:34 +0100 From: "Koster, K.J." <K.J.Koster@kpn.com> To: 'Greg Lewis' <glewis@trc.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: JCK License implications (was: State of Server-Side Java) Message-ID: <59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E4522026D77D0@l04.research.kpn.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> Well, it might be even worse than that. Its not clear to me
> that I'll still be able to release patchsets once we merge a
> newer version of the JDK 1.2.2 source code as that code will
> have been obtained under the same licensing conditions as the
> JCK.
>
That merger had better give you a pretty great advantage, to make up for the
legal lock-out.
>
> I'm considering how this can be avoided while still making
> progress on a binary release. I really don't want to lose
> the possibility of things like Fuyuhiko-san's native thread
> patches happening in the future.
>
Perhaps you could track two patchsets. One for Sun's newer code, and one for
Sun's public release.
Alternately, perhaps we could tell Sun that this is a blocking problem for a
community effort, and ask them to release the newer code under SCSL. After
all, it is yesterday's technology, with 1.3 on the market. :-)
Kees Jan
=================================================
TV is the worst of both worlds. It's not as
good at words as radio is because the pictures
are a distraction which demand attention, and
it's not as good as cinema because the pictures
are not nearly as good.
Douglas Adams
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E4522026D77D0>