Clarification and apologies (was Re: Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system)
Hi all, I just to clear any possible misunderstandings. After reading in a previous post that Classpath was not being "actively developed" anymore, I said that it would be a pity to let the project die, and suggested that perhaps it was time to look for an adopter (http://developer.classpath.org/pipermail/classpath/2014-August/003270.html) My point was that *if* the current maintainers didn't have enough time or resources to work on Classpath anymore, then *perhaps* they could look for a "competent successor" that could take on the job. I used the term in the same sense as Eric S Raymond in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar". This did not imply that the current maintainers were not competent -- that is not what I think, and it is not what I said. I have also took quite a bit of heat for "complaining rather than helping". I want to say that I was not complaining. I was merely trying to be helpful. Of course anyone is free to think that this was not helpful at all, but I hope that at least it is clear that my *intention* was to help. Anyway, I would like to sincerely apologize if I managed to annoy anyone. It was never my intention. Best, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia guille.rodrig...@gmail.com
Re: Clarification and apologies (was Re: Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system)
On 09/05/2014 12:07 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > After reading in a previous post that Classpath was not being > "actively developed" anymore, I said that it would be a pity to let > the project die, and suggested that perhaps it was time to look for an > adopter > (http://developer.classpath.org/pipermail/classpath/2014-August/003270.html) That was perhaps my fault; I said it was not being actively developed, when I should have said it was not much being actively developed. That's a subtle distinction, but one that matters to some people. Andrew.
Re: Clarification and apologies (was Re: Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system)
GCJ needs to use IcedTea. Unfortunately the difference between most Java developers who want to compile Java to a native executable and a GCC hacker is vast. Brian On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 09/05/2014 12:07 PM, Guillermo Rodriguez Garcia wrote: > > After reading in a previous post that Classpath was not being > > "actively developed" anymore, I said that it would be a pity to let > > the project die, and suggested that perhaps it was time to look for an > > adopter ( > http://developer.classpath.org/pipermail/classpath/2014-August/003270.html > ) > > That was perhaps my fault; I said it was not being actively developed, > when I should have said it was not much being actively developed. > That's a subtle distinction, but one that matters to some people. > > Andrew. > >
Re: Clarification and apologies (was Re: Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system)
On 09/05/2014 06:53 PM, Brian Jones wrote: > GCJ needs to use IcedTea. What for? > Unfortunately the difference between most Java developers who want > to compile Java to a native executable and a GCC hacker is vast. Hard to argue with that. Andrew.
Re: Clarification and apologies (was Re: Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system)
> On Sep 5, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > >> On 09/05/2014 06:53 PM, Brian Jones wrote: >> GCJ needs to use IcedTea. > > What for? > Just mean updating to OpenJDK, understanding Java 6,7,8,9,... I always thought fitting into embedded here was a tiny bit technical (only include just what this app needs) & mostly packaging. Brian >> Unfortunately the difference between most Java developers who want >> to compile Java to a native executable and a GCC hacker is vast. > > Hard to argue with that. > > Andrew. >
Re: Clarification and apologies (was Re: Re: GCJ ------ file type not supported by system)
On 06/09/14 00:36, Brian Jones wrote: >> On Sep 5, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >>> On 09/05/2014 06:53 PM, Brian Jones wrote: >>> GCJ needs to use IcedTea. >> >> What for? > > Just mean updating to OpenJDK, understanding Java 6,7,8,9,... Absolutely. I know what this involves, and have been looking for a reason to do this for a long time. I think that in some areas this could be very useful. But it's a lot of work, and it might be hard to get high performance. Andrew.
