I think the issue is that some code in Felix needs to compile against
j.m.i classes. Since the build uses Java 1.4, there are no j.m.i classes
to compile against. So while Felix should not need to ship or distrbute
the j.m.i classes it does need the some j.m.i classes to compile certain
bundles. So j.m.i is needed the build env for Felix.
OSGi provides ee.foundation.jar which contains j.m.i class stubs from
CDC/Foundation 1.0 and is designed to compile against. OSGi uses
ee.foundation.jar duing compile time to resolve all j.m.i reference in the
OSGi code base.
BJ Hargrave
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM
OSGi Fellow and CTO of the OSGi Alliance
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Office: +1 407 849 9117 Mobile: +1 386 848 3788
Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
08/17/2006 11:46 AM
Please respond to
felix-dev@incubator.apache.org
To
felix-dev@incubator.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: Using javax.microedition.io
Upayavira wrote:
> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
>
>>Richard S. Hall wrote:
>>
>>
>>>It seems like we could just remove the offending code with the
>>>dependency until it is resolved if this were going to hold up
graduation.
>>
>>What offending code though? Referencing the javax.microedition classes
>>seems fine from the licence terms of the JSR 139 specification? It
includes:
>>
>> Sun Microsystems, Inc. ("Sun") hereby grants you a
>> fully-paid, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
>> worldwide, limited license (without the right to
>> sublicense), under the Sun's applicable
>> intellectual property rights to view, download,
>> use and reproduce the Specification only for the
>> purpose of internal evaluation, which shall be
>> understood to include developing applications
>> intended to run on an implementation of the
>> Specification provided that such applications do
>> not themselves implement any portion(s) of the
>> Specification.
>>
>>JSR-000139 Connected Limited Device Configuration 1.1
>>(Final Release)
>>
>>http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/final/jsr139/index.html
>> follow the links to download the spec and then review licence.
>
>
> "without the right to sublicense"
>
> Isn't that enough to scupper us?
Hmmm, ok, got me there. Doesn't that mean that writing any application
against J2ME CLDC is not allowed.
Dan.
