Given andy's post here, I should re-phrase my own wording: On Sun, 2005-05-15 at 03:35 +0200, Sven de Marothy wrote: > Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > - We don't want to modify any classpath code. If we need changes, we > > can work with classpath folks. > > - We don't want to add classpath sources to our tree. this will avoid > > local changes. > > Well, those two are of course obviously what we'd like best too.
Naturally we want our code to be modified! We're hoping on lots of improvements coming from the Harmony project. We just would prefer if Harmony wouldn't have their own source tree. Currently a lot of class library fixes are being contributed to libgcj, and syncing these is a lot of extra work. Dalibor has plenty of work merging Classpath changes into Kaffe too. So it'd mean less work for everybody if Classpath was a single jar and changes could go directly into our tree. /Sven
