On Jun 8, 2005, at 12:07 AM, Phillip Rhodes wrote:
Sven de Marothy wrote:
Geir.. I really don't get your position here. The way I read your
arguments are: Harmony should spend time and energy
implementing Sun's class library interface, which is proprietary,
closed-source, unspecified, may change at any time and requires a
licensing agreement with Sun to be practically useful.
And if Harmony doesn't spend time on this, it'd be 'willfully
restricting' the ability of users?
I really don't view it that way. I view it as 'Is it worth spending
effort on this?'.
Just to keep things clear, no one suggested we spend time to
implement Sun's class library interface.
+1
I don't claim to know the final word on the subject by any means...
but my gut feeling is that almost nobody is going to want/need to
download
Harmony and then use a different class lib that the one that's
included.
If we pass the TCK and make a quality product (VM + Classlib) I
believe
people will either download and use it, or not download and use it,
as a
whole. I have a very difficult time seeing the need for spending a
lot
of time worrying about allowing people to switch out classlibraries.
I can see some very unlikely edge cases that might prompt somebody
to mix-n-match classlibs and VMs, but it doesn't strike me as being a
particularly important feature.
For end-users, you are right. They'll want to get our distribution,
and just use it.
However, not everyone will be an end user - people take apache
software all the time and create derivative works, and that is one of
our constituencies here.
geir
TTYL,
Phil
--
North Carolina - First In Freedom
Free America - Vote Libertarian
www.lp.org
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
