On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 05:41:08PM -0500, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > I don't see much value in "java2-virtual-machine" unless it actually
> > means a complete Java 2 runtime environment.
> >
> > Our new packages currently provide j2re and j2re<major>.<minor>.
>
> The idea is that much as I love the blackdown port, one wants to allow for
> multiple JVMs that all offer a runtime environment that claims to be more or
> less Java 2 compatible (this includes java2-virtual-machine-dummy
> representing my-favourite-non-packaged-JVM).
I think his (Juergen's) point is that j2re is simply a better
description of this claim than java2-virtual-machine. After all,
the Java 2 virtual machine spec is only one part of the runtime
spec. I don't think he meant j2re to refer specifically to
anybody's implementation (even though it is confusing that the name
suggests Sun's distribution); rather that j2re should be the virtual
package name.
I tend to agree that the name java2-virtual-machine is a little
misleading and perhaps silly (a remnant from when "virtual machine"
was a hot buzzword). Perhaps something like java2-runtime?
Andrew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
