Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 18:19:13 -0700 From: "Anthony Green" <green@redhat.com> To: "Greg Lewis" <glewis@eyesbeyond.com>, <shudo@computer.org> Cc: <freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Contributing... Message-ID: <000201c12f00$096e17c0$5be6b4cd@cygnus.com> References: <3B8688AA.6956F1BD@ideasandassociates.com> <20010825115852W.shudoh@aist.go.jp> <20010826021022.A43240@misty.eyesbeyond.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg wrote: > There is certainly > nothing in the SCSL which says I can't work on any other Java > projects like that. Is it GNU policy? We at Cygnus (now Red Hat) established the GCJ and Mauve policies before gcj/libgcj was donated to the FSF. At the time it was very unclear how Sun would react to cleanroom Java Programming Language implementations. To be honest, it's still not all that clear to me. I think we've been very flexible on Mauve. Our compiler and runtime library are a different matter. We're still being extremely careful about potential copyright violations - perhaps overly so - but it's not clear how this policy is impeding our progress, so we'll probably just continue along with the status quo. While I'm on the subject I'll complain about something that is really troublesome. Some of the more recent specs from Sun (J2ME and others) say something like: feel free to implement a cleanroom version of this spec, but make sure you implement every single class and no more. What's not clear to me is how rules like this play in the Open Source world. Does this mean no intermediate releases with missing functionality? Do you have to be "closed source" until it's all done? I suppose I'll have to go to Sun for clarification, but opinions are welcome. Thanks, AG 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?000201c12f00$096e17c0$5be6b4cd>