Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
2014-09-03 20:00 GMT+02:00 Mark Wielaard : > On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 19:31 +0200, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: >> Is the web >> page itself under source control? How can I contribute patches or >> updates to that? > > All the docs and the web pages are under source control. The webpages > are checked into their own repository, but are generated from the main > sources. http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/?root=classpath > > See the README under the doc/www.gnu.org directory in the source repo: > http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/classpath.git/tree/doc/www.gnu.org/README Thank you, I will have a look at this. -- Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia guille.rodrig...@gmail.com
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 10:59 -0700, Per Bothner wrote: > On 09/03/2014 09:35 AM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > > What would you like me to do? How can I help ? > > More useful than updating Classoath per se would be creating > a version of GCJ that uses OpenJDK's javac for compiling to bytecodes, > and OpenJDK classes (or at least mostly so). This is a big project, > but has a chance of being useful and maintained. > > There may be licensing issues that should be considered before > charging full steam ahead. > > I'm out of the loop, so I don't know if anything like that is happening. This is happening (or has already). The code has been written by one of the GCC GSoC students (now at Oracle) Dalibor Topic: "Integrating OpenJDK's javac bytecode compiler into gcj " https://code.google.com/p/google-summer-of-code-2007-gcc/downloads/detail?name=Dalibor_Topic.tar.gz&can=2&q= Someone integrating that into mainline would be welcome I think. Cheers, Mark
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
On Wed, 2014-09-03 at 19:31 +0200, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > Is the web > page itself under source control? How can I contribute patches or > updates to that? All the docs and the web pages are under source control. The webpages are checked into their own repository, but are generated from the main sources. http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/?root=classpath See the README under the doc/www.gnu.org directory in the source repo: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/classpath.git/tree/doc/www.gnu.org/README
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
On 09/03/2014 09:35 AM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: What would you like me to do? How can I help ? More useful than updating Classoath per se would be creating a version of GCJ that uses OpenJDK's javac for compiling to bytecodes, and OpenJDK classes (or at least mostly so). This is a big project, but has a chance of being useful and maintained. There may be licensing issues that should be considered before charging full steam ahead. I'm out of the loop, so I don't know if anything like that is happening. I'd start with switching to using javac. When I'd add/replace whatever non-core classes that don't wouldn't conflict with GCJ/Classpath core classes. Maybe this wold be a fork or branch of Classpath, or maybe the mainline - depends on the changes. In general, the sanest way to update classpath is to merge in OpenJDK code. (Again, assuming licensing and other policy issues have been evaluated.) However, the OpenJDK classes may depend on recent Java language features. Which is why projects using Classpath should switch to using OpenJDK's javac. (I don't believe Eclipse's compiler is as solid or complete, though that may be my bias from having worked with javac engineers. It's probably good enough for at least the initial stages of merging in OpenJDK classes.) -- --Per Bothner p...@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
2014-09-03 19:11 GMT+02:00 Andrew Haley : > Hi, > > On 09/03/2014 05:35 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> 2014-09-03 18:30 GMT+02:00 Andrew Haley : >>> On 09/03/2014 05:12 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: 1. Development of GNU Classpath seems to be stalled now (quoting from an earlier post from Andrew Haley: "I have to tell you that Classpath is not being actively developed, so your problem is unlikely to be fixed.") 2. This is due to the lack of manpower, which in turn is probably due to the lack of interested developers, but also to the fact that most of the development effort of the current team is going to OpenJDK instead. 3. Given the above, perhaps the current maintainers should consider switching priorities and start actively looking for a "competent successor" (as in lesson #5 of ESR's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"). >>> >>> Your opinion has been noted. Now, what do *you* intend to do to help? >> >> I am willing to help where possible. Sending patches or bugfixes is OK >> (and I will do so if I come across any problems), but in my opinion >> this does not address the real problem. For example *I* cannot update >> the GNU Classpath page to list 0.99, and not 0.98, as the current >> version. > > Almost all of GNU Classpath is under source control, and patches are > welcome. A new version of the web page is welcome. Having said that, > I don't have access to the web page, but I think we can get it. I think updating the web page is badly needed. At least 0.99 should be listed, and perhaps it would be good to add a pointer to the Git repository -- I don't think CVS is very popular these days. Is the web page itself under source control? How can I contribute patches or updates to that? > >> What would you like me to do? How can I help ? > > I think I'd like people to fix problems when they find them. Sure! > "Update Classpath to Java 1.6." isn't a reasonable interim goal. Now that OpenJDK is available, Classpath cannot just aim to be "another OpenJDK". I think Classpath is a good match for embedded systems. And in that environment, compatibility with the latest Java versions is less important IMHO. -- Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia guille.rodrig...@gmail.com
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
Hi, On 09/03/2014 05:35 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > 2014-09-03 18:30 GMT+02:00 Andrew Haley : >> On 09/03/2014 05:12 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: >>> 1. Development of GNU Classpath seems to be stalled now (quoting from >>> an earlier post from Andrew Haley: "I have to tell you that Classpath >>> is not being actively developed, so your problem is unlikely to be >>> fixed.") >>> >>> 2. This is due to the lack of manpower, which in turn is probably due >>> to the lack of interested developers, but also to the fact that most >>> of the development effort of the current team is going to OpenJDK >>> instead. >>> >>> 3. Given the above, perhaps the current maintainers should consider >>> switching priorities and start actively looking for a "competent >>> successor" (as in lesson #5 of ESR's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"). >> >> Your opinion has been noted. Now, what do *you* intend to do to help? > > I am willing to help where possible. Sending patches or bugfixes is OK > (and I will do so if I come across any problems), but in my opinion > this does not address the real problem. For example *I* cannot update > the GNU Classpath page to list 0.99, and not 0.98, as the current > version. Almost all of GNU Classpath is under source control, and patches are welcome. A new version of the web page is welcome. Having said that, I don't have access to the web page, but I think we can get it. > What would you like me to do? How can I help ? I think I'd like people to fix problems when they find them. "Update Classpath to Java 1.6." isn't a reasonable interim goal. Andrew.
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
Hi Andrew, 2014-09-03 18:30 GMT+02:00 Andrew Haley : > On 09/03/2014 05:12 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: >> 1. Development of GNU Classpath seems to be stalled now (quoting from >> an earlier post from Andrew Haley: "I have to tell you that Classpath >> is not being actively developed, so your problem is unlikely to be >> fixed.") >> >> 2. This is due to the lack of manpower, which in turn is probably due >> to the lack of interested developers, but also to the fact that most >> of the development effort of the current team is going to OpenJDK >> instead. >> >> 3. Given the above, perhaps the current maintainers should consider >> switching priorities and start actively looking for a "competent >> successor" (as in lesson #5 of ESR's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"). > > Your opinion has been noted. Now, what do *you* intend to do to help? I am willing to help where possible. Sending patches or bugfixes is OK (and I will do so if I come across any problems), but in my opinion this does not address the real problem. For example *I* cannot update the GNU Classpath page to list 0.99, and not 0.98, as the current version. What would you like me to do? How can I help ? -- Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia guille.rodrig...@gmail.com
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
On 09/03/2014 05:12 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > 1. Development of GNU Classpath seems to be stalled now (quoting from > an earlier post from Andrew Haley: "I have to tell you that Classpath > is not being actively developed, so your problem is unlikely to be > fixed.") > > 2. This is due to the lack of manpower, which in turn is probably due > to the lack of interested developers, but also to the fact that most > of the development effort of the current team is going to OpenJDK > instead. > > 3. Given the above, perhaps the current maintainers should consider > switching priorities and start actively looking for a "competent > successor" (as in lesson #5 of ESR's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"). Your opinion has been noted. Now, what do *you* intend to do to help? Andrew.
Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system
Hi Mario, 2014-09-01 12:47 GMT+02:00 Mario Torre : [...] >> Yes I am sure about this, but that is not my point. What I am saying >> is that it would be very good for the project to be maintained by a >> team who really wants to move things forward. >> > > I understand what you mean, but the current maintainer has always > integrated patches and done releases, I think the problem is not the > lack of one maintainer willing to move forward, is lack of manpower to > do it. Well,part of the job of the maintainer for an OSS project, perhaps the most important one, is to attract and motivate other developers. This is how the 'lack of manpower' problem is solved. Just as an example: 0.99 is now over 2 years old, yet the official Classpath site still lists 0.98 (2009) as "current". 0.99 is not even listed in the downloads page. If the first thing a developer sees is that the latest release is more than 5 years old, that does not exactly help. I already mentioned this in this list, by the way (https://www.mail-archive.com/classpath@gnu.org/msg15456.html). Also I am not the first one to raise these concerns. Pekka Enberg wrote an excellent post about "the future of GNU Classpath" in Dec 2010, and the situation has not changed a lot since then. I cannot find the original post anymore (the blog was hosted at posterous spaces, which is no longer available), but the thread in the ML remains (http://www.spinics.net/lists/gnu-classpath/msg03027.html). But you already know this of course, since you took part in that conversation. > > As I said, anyone can step in, if patches start to flow (including bug > fixes) I'm sure they'll be integrated correctly and quickly. > > If someone wants to take the project, the best thing to do is to start > contributing patches. After all, how can the maintainer know if someone > is seriously willing to take his role if there lack of a serious and > recent contribution flow? > Of course if someone wanted to take on the project, then that would be the process. I completely agree with you. At the end what I am saying is that: 1. Development of GNU Classpath seems to be stalled now (quoting from an earlier post from Andrew Haley: "I have to tell you that Classpath is not being actively developed, so your problem is unlikely to be fixed.") 2. This is due to the lack of manpower, which in turn is probably due to the lack of interested developers, but also to the fact that most of the development effort of the current team is going to OpenJDK instead. 3. Given the above, perhaps the current maintainers should consider switching priorities and start actively looking for a "competent successor" (as in lesson #5 of ESR's "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"). Best, -- Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia guille.rodrig...@gmail.com
