I'm working for BEA. BEA makes a JVM just like SUN. Therefore I'm probably biased. I don't really know which way that bias would go here, but I probably am.
BEA has nothing to do with this bug report, it's my personal opinion, blah, blah. And since BEA is licensing code from SUN, if SUN's JVM could be distributed by Debian, BEA's JVM probably could as well. I would like that. So nobody would be happier than me if SUN came up with licensing terms that allowed Debian to distribute SUN's JVM (and thus BEA's JVM as well). But AFAICT, SUN haven't done that, and to me Debian is a lot about actually reading and following license agreements. Even when it hurts and people on Slashdot whines about Debian being silly. That hasn't been done here AFAICT. If SUN wanted Debian to distribute their JVM, it should be up to SUN to come up with licensing terms that Debian could follow. It's not up to Debian to say "oh, but they *want* us to distribute so let's not worry too much about what the licensing terms say". Regards //Johan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
