From owner-freebsd-java Wed Sep 9 09:06:10 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA02722 for freebsd-java-outgoing; Wed, 9 Sep 1998 09:06:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from manchester.genrad.com (x229.genrad.co.uk [195.99.3.229]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA02714 for ; Wed, 9 Sep 1998 09:06:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from swindellsr@genrad.co.uk) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 09:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199809091606.JAA02714@hub.freebsd.org> Received: from CDP275.uk.genrad.com by manchester.genrad.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.0.1460.8) id RRCMGA0D; Wed, 9 Sep 1998 17:06:01 +0100 From: Robert Swindells To: gback@cs.utah.edu CC: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <199809091527.JAA13391@sal.cs.utah.edu> (message from Godmar Back on Wed, 9 Sep 1998 09:27:43 -0600 (MDT)) Subject: Re: Daemonising a Java Process: Possible? Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >> >> >If so, why a binary-only release? Is that your decision or would that >> >result from the licensing restrictions Sun puts on your port? >> >> It just seemed safer not to be forced to release the source. It avoids >> giving Transvirtual any legal problems if Sun felt that the port gave >> away information about the internals of the JVM. >> >> I was considering it to be "our" port anyway. The source could get >> added to the JDK CVS repository. >> >> >>From my knowledge of the history of Kaffe's licenses, this would >> >>appear to be the kind of behavior that led Transvirtual to using >> >>the (more restrictive) GPL in the first place. >> >> I was always intending to offer the source back to Transvirtual. >> >On one hand, you're saying you want to avoid legal trouble because >the port might give away information about Sun's JVM internals. >On the other hand, you're intending to offer the source back to >Transvirtual. >How would Transvirtual's legal problems be reduced if only they >had access to sources that in your opinion might give away information >about Sun's JVM? Because it can be on *their* terms. They can make a judgement on whether or not they want to taint their sources without worrying whether any of their other contributors could have seen my code. Don't get me wrong, I respect what they are doing, I just think they need to be more careful about not infringing Sun's licences. I don't want to be the one that causes them to get sued. Robert Swindells To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message