Hi Tim, On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 16:56 +0000, Tim Ellison wrote: > Mark Wielaard wrote: > > Right! I have been thinking on how to move forward with this. And I am > > excited to see some core class library code since that is where my > > expertise is. Obviously we should be able to extend this easily with > > parts of the GNU Classpath library like awt, beans, corba, crypto, > > swing, sql, most of javax, imageio, naming, etc and the 1.5 additions we > > have plus the generic classes from the classpath-generics branch. > > Great. That will be a good opportunity to work together on a class > library componentization story too!
I am glad you see opportunities here. Note that there have been people doing such a combination of the old OTI libraries with GNU Classpath already inside IBM. They even wrote a nice paper about it that might be worth a read: http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/442/alpern.pdf > I agree that getting a resolution to the community/licensing differences > would be fantastic. I don't see that happening quickly, and I don't > want to see the success or failure of a development project gated upon > it. IMHO resolving license issues is a board-level objective, not a > J2SE-project objective. We can hack code and live in hope :-) I believe people are really reluctant to hack on the code while there is a legal limbo whether it can be included into the other code bases out there and whether it is meant as a project to enhance all the existing projects or just another project on the side. So I see resolving this issues as a high priority. Cheers, Mark -- Escape the Java Trap with GNU Classpath! http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html Join the community at http://planet.classpath.org/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
