Mark, Could you please elaborate a bit on adding value in jdb? All java programmers whom I know use IDE for debug.
I still believe this is a good task because it is simple and educating. Thanks. On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Mark Hindess <[email protected]> wrote: > > In message <[email protected]>, > Andrew John Hughes writes: >> >> 2009/2/24 Nathan Beyer <[email protected]>: >> > >> > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Andrew John Hughes >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> 2009/2/23 Nathan Beyer <[email protected]>: >> >> >> >>> How about a javadoc tool baseline implementation? >> >> >> >> There are already at least three such tools under FOSS licenses. Why >> >> would we need another? >> > >> > Are any under an ALv2 compatible license that we can package? >> >> I believe gjdoc and Sun's javadoc are under the GPL. If Apache >> Harmony can't be used to run Java programs licensed under the GPL, you >> may as well give up now. > > I think you missed the point of Nathan's question. The key terms > were 'ALv2 compatible' and 'package'. Running programs and > packaging/distributing them are entirely separate issues. > > Nathan was trying to determine if any of the implementations you mention > might help in meeting the goals of this project. As stated on the > project homepage, a goal of the Apache Harmony Project is to create: > > A compatible, independent implementation of the Java SE 5 JDK under > the Apache License v2 > > If there was a suitable javadoc under a compatible license[0] that we > could include in an ALv2 distribution then we certainly would consider > it over re-inventing the wheel. But I don't believe there is one? > > When the license is compatible, we are just as happy to reuse existing > components from other projects - such as Xerces, Xalan, BCEL, and > concurrent. Other Java projects with different goals may be pragmatic > about what they decide is compatible with their choice of license. > > Getting back to the topic of GSoC 2009, javadoc would not be top of my > priority list for tools to implement for Harmony. A jdb implementation > would probably be my most-wanted tool (probably built on the eclipse > jdi). The reasons for this is that I think that jdb is a tool where > there is quite a lot of room of improvement/adding-value (such as adding > JSR-45 support). I expect this would be more satisfying for a student > than implementing javadoc. > > Regards, > Mark. > > [0] There is some discussion of what is classed as compatible at: > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > > > -- С уважением, Алексей Федотов, http://people.apache.org/~aaf/
