> I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and you would do well to remember that. I agree, no one owes anyone anything. That's why I'm trying to make an offer to do the work at a cost or take the code and distribute under a different license. I'm offering a business deal, not asking for charity. > You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread. Thanks for your help, enjoy your day On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 20:49:50 GMT, David Lloyd <david.ll...@redhat.com> wrote: On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Ashton Hogan <ashtonho...@ymail.com> wrote: > David, I understand that you don't use this feature of the JDK and that's > absolutely fine. I'm not the type of person to impose my way of doing things > on anyone. I hope that you aren't either. There are obviously many people in > the community that DO love and use this httpserver for many reasons that I > won't go into here as that is not the point of this discussion. > > IIRC JDK is backward compatible so highly unlikely that it's going to be > removed.
The specification parts of the JDK are backwards compatible but the HTTP server is not part of the Java SE specification; nevertheless, even things that were part of the SE specification (CORBA, and the other EE modules) have been removed for Java 11 so I wouldn't put all my eggs in that basket. > If you did find a way to remove it, I would also be open to having > the source code donated to myself to refactor and rebuild under a different > license. I'd be open to discussing this in more detail as well if need be. I consider this unlikely as that's a question for the copyright holders; however, you can fork this code even so, as it is available under GPL+classpath as well as CDDL. Talk to your lawyer about options, and I think you'll find you have several. > Going back to the original discussion, you mention that points 2, 3 and 4 > are subjective. As per my original request, please do put forward your > points of view so that they can be discussed in more detail if you believe > that they are wrong. No thank you; I am not personally interested in this code. I only replied as a service to you, to help you understand the OpenJDK community process a little bit better. > Pragmatically speaking, the development can be done on your end to improve > the JDK OR on my end at a cost. I'm open to either. OK, sounds good. > Please do try and stay on topic in future responses. Ashton, I observe that you are not doing a great job at your first engagement of an open source community. I don't really have any dogs in this race, other than to maybe guide you a little bit, but at this point I'd suggest you "check yourself". Coming into any community and immediately making demands without any attempts to understand the existing culture is not a great way to get started; you will only alienate people (like me, now). I do not owe you anything, nor would I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and you would do well to remember that. You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread. -- - DML