firstNonNullClassLoader for jamvm

2006-08-20 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi, GNU Classpath CVS needs a new VMClassLoader.firstNonNullClassLoader() method. Here is a quick and dirty implementation (based on getCallerFrame()) which works for me. I have also installed this temporarily on builder.classpath.org to get mauve results again. We will see how well it does soon

Re: Bringing License arguments to Sun

2006-08-20 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >> CDDL is an example of clever lawyer work to modernize best licensing >> practices, but those are best practices in protection not in social >> empowerment! > > I don't understand that. Do you see the CDDL as somehow restricting > communities? No, I see CDDL somethin

[Bug classpath/28412] [regex] Matcher.hitEnd missing

2006-08-20 Thread cvs-commit at developer dot classpath dot org
--- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at developer dot classpath dot org 2006-08-20 17:05 --- Subject: Bug 28412 CVSROOT:/cvsroot/classpath Module name:classpath Changes by: Ito Kazumitsu 06/08/20 14:47:33 Modified files: . : ChangeLog gnu/java

Re: Bringing License arguments to Sun

2006-08-20 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi
Simon Phipps wrote: > > On Aug 20, 2006, at 03:38, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >> So, if we assume for a second that Sun can use the license as a carrot >> rather than a stick, my suggestion would be to use the simplest and more >> compatible license possible. >> >> I'll bite: the MIT license. >

Re: Bringing License arguments to Sun

2006-08-20 Thread Chris Gray
On Sunday 20 August 2006 12:27, Simon Phipps wrote: > On Aug 20, 2006, at 09:54, Chris Gray wrote: > > +1 to Stefano Mazzocchi: > > Noted, thanks. (and edited so I am making fair use of your > copyrighted material - I don't want to get sued...) My cat can be vicious. :-) > > The specs should be

Re: Bringing License arguments to Sun

2006-08-20 Thread Simon Phipps
On Aug 20, 2006, at 03:38, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: So, if we assume for a second that Sun can use the license as a carrot rather than a stick, my suggestion would be to use the simplest and more compatible license possible. I'll bite: the MIT license. Thanks, Stefano, I appreciate the ra

Re: Bringing License arguments to Sun

2006-08-20 Thread Simon Phipps
On Aug 20, 2006, at 09:54, Chris Gray wrote: +1 to Stefano Mazzocchi: Noted, thanks. (and edited so I am making fair use of your copyrighted material - I don't want to get sued...) The specs should be licensed in a way that is compatible with the requirements of standards bodies such

Re: Bringing License arguments to Sun

2006-08-20 Thread Chris Gray
+1 to Stefano Mazzocchi: a Reference Implementation should have an MIT- or BSD-style licence. It worked for TCP/IP, it worked for X11, or JPEG and for countless other things. It's good for interoperability, becuase it encourages people to use the RI as a base and only tinker with those things th