[If you want me to read your messages, copy them to me: I've unsubscribed.]
I'm changing, I'm leaving for a new employer and, in my new office, I will no longer
use Java (which is a good thing for me, see hereunder).
Therefore, I stop maintaining java-common (I will send an official ITO
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
[If you want me to read your messages, copy them to me: I've unsubscribed.]
I'm changing, I'm leaving for a new employer and, in my new office, I will no longer
use Java (which is a good thing for me, see hereunder).
Ufff
One good news in this day (really bad
Peter Moulder wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:27:41PM +0100, Artur Radosz wrote:
One good news in this day (really bad day for me)!
Maybe now something with java-debain will change.
Go away.
What do you think you achieve by sending this message?
Stephan has already announced his
On Thursday 1 March 2001, at 16 h 40, the keyboard of Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anyway i hope that after quiting main Java2 blocker
I will learn Peter's lesson, I will not write this is absurd. But it is: the
fact that Java2 is non-free (and not even redistributable) is not my
How many people are in this list? How many want to use Java
on a Debian system?
We can certainly pool our resources together to get a good
Java infrastructure going.
It is kind of stupid on my part, but I have resorted to run
Java on my Win2k laptop.
Bao
-Original Message-
It is a consequence of Sun's licensing and Debian policy.
I don't think finger pointing, even to Sun, will help at
this point. We just need to figure out a way to work
around the problem.
Personally, I wish Sun goes to H***! They also manage to
wound other good ideas severely, like JINI with
Java on Linux is important. Debian is important Linux.
As hard as it may be to wade through the free/non-free
waters and sort out a viable directory structure,
java policy, etc., the long term benefits are
significant.
What I appreciate is wiring java and the inumerable
libraries/jars into
Hi,
Maybe I have missed the point (getting ready to be flamed :-)) but what is
the problem of downloading the Sun JDK and running it on Linux? It is very
easy to configure and use, and although slow, it is very reliable?
Even if you can't distribute Sun's JDK with Debian, you can still *use*
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Thursday 1 March 2001, at 16 h 40, the keyboard of Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anyway i hope that after quiting main Java2 blocker
I will learn Peter's lesson, I will not write this is absurd. But it is: the
fact that Java2 is non-free (and
Colin Michael Yates wrote:
Hi,
Maybe I have missed the point (getting ready to be flamed :-)) but what is
the problem of downloading the Sun JDK and running it on Linux? It is very
easy to configure and use, and although slow, it is very reliable?
Yes, it`s true.
Even if you can't
I don't think finger pointing, even to Sun, will help at
this point. We just need to figure out a way to work
around the problem.
Greetings,
I run java on my Debian box (since I am firm in my resolve to use no other
Linux Distribution), and I follow the practice of downloading from
Evan Prodromou wrote:
"AR" == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AR But it will be good to have this in debian dist. This and
AR others java lib, applications or systems.
It can't be in Debian, since it's not DFSG-Free.
If it can be legally redistributed with Debian,
Evan,
That presents a problem. Java itself is free, but Sun's implementation is
not. For this reason, forcing all packages which depend on
`java-virtual-machine' or whatever is pretty unfair. Packages that depend
specifically on Sun's implementation, however, belong in contrib.
Regards,
Alex.
"Nicolas" == Nicols Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm talking to Sun about a possible amendment to our license which
would allow our deb packages to go into Debian (non-free). Currently
I'm waiting for feedback from Sun's legal department.
Nicols BTW, you are listed
Has anyone worked on packaging the FOP software at
URL:http://xml.apache.org/fop/index.html
?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 10:27]:
Yeah, but with this solution there is no way to include other free java2
apzz and libs in distribution.
Artur, the problem is very simple. I hope I can explain it simply enough
for you to understand; while languages are often beautiful, english
Seth,
Sun did not license Java in a non-free manner. They licensed _their
implementation_ of Java in a non-free manner. Java itself is not subject
to a license of any kind, but just some straightforward IP protections to
keep people (like Micro$oft) from forking Java. Which is bad, for obvious
* Alexander Hvostov [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 19:49]:
Sun did not license Java in a non-free manner. They licensed _their
implementation_ of Java in a non-free manner. Java itself is not subject
to a license of any kind, but just some straightforward IP protections to
keep people (like
Hi, I hate to see a great people like you leaving. I haven't been
reading all other followups yet, so please forgive me if there's any
repeated message.
Therefore, I stop maintaining java-common (I will send an official ITO unless
someone steps in really fast) and the proposed Java policy.
* Alan KF LAU [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 20:32]:
Also one of the very annoying thing in kaffe bother me much is that it
has not implemented java.security. It is a mistake or an intention to
make Java insecure? See
http://www.kaffe.org/cgi-bin/kaffe/security?user=guest;addsignature=1
I think
(followups set to debian-devel; please take this off of debian-java if
replying)
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 09:57:11PM -0800, Alexander Hvostov wrote:
I hope DMFR behaves differently, then, because I will probably miss
non-free. I have about a page worth of non-free software installed:
-
[Note: This is Cc'd to debian-devel and debian-security because of the
discussion regarding RMS' su diatribe; subscribers to these lists
might find it interesting, scroll down past the Java stuff if you are,
and feel free to ignore this message if you're not. Please don't flame
me. I'm
[If you want me to read your messages, copy them to me: I've unsubscribed.]
I'm changing, I'm leaving for a new employer and, in my new office, I will no
longer use Java (which is a good thing for me, see hereunder).
Therefore, I stop maintaining java-common (I will send an official ITO
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
[If you want me to read your messages, copy them to me: I've unsubscribed.]
I'm changing, I'm leaving for a new employer and, in my new office, I will no longer use Java (which is a good thing for me, see hereunder).
Ufff
One good news in this day (really bad day for
Peter Moulder wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:27:41PM +0100, Artur Radosz wrote:
One good news in this day (really bad day for me)!
Maybe now something with java-debain will change.
Go away.
What do you think you achieve by sending this message?
Stephan has already announced his intentions, so
On Thursday 1 March 2001, at 16 h 40, the keyboard of Artur Radosz [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anyway i hope that after quiting main Java2 blocker
I will learn Peter's lesson, I will not write this is absurd. But it is: the
fact that Java2 is non-free (and not even redistributable) is not my
How many people are in this list? How many want to use Java
on a Debian system?
We can certainly pool our resources together to get a good
Java infrastructure going.
It is kind of stupid on my part, but I have resorted to run
Java on my Win2k laptop.
Bao
-Original Message-
It is a consequence of Sun's licensing and Debian policy.
I don't think finger pointing, even to Sun, will help at
this point. We just need to figure out a way to work
around the problem.
Personally, I wish Sun goes to H***! They also manage to
wound other good ideas severely, like JINI with
Java on Linux is important. Debian is important Linux.
As hard as it may be to wade through the free/non-free
waters and sort out a viable directory structure,
java policy, etc., the long term benefits are
significant.
What I appreciate is wiring java and the inumerable
libraries/jars into
Hi,
Maybe I have missed the point (getting ready to be flamed :-)) but what is
the problem of downloading the Sun JDK and running it on Linux? It is very
easy to configure and use, and although slow, it is very reliable?
Even if you can't distribute Sun's JDK with Debian, you can still *use*
I have no trouble running Java on my Debian system. I download the jdk
from Sun, throw it in /usr/local and run. BTW, I do the same for Apache
and several other programs too. I appreciate Debian for the overall
OS and environment, but even if I was using Windows, RedHat, or even
Solaris! I
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Thursday 1 March 2001, at 16 h 40, the keyboard of Artur Radosz [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
wrote:
Anyway i hope that after quiting main Java2 blocker
I will learn Peter's lesson, I will not write this is absurd. But it is: the
fact that Java2 is non-free (and not even
Colin Michael Yates wrote:
Hi,
Maybe I have missed the point (getting ready to be flamed :-)) but what is
the problem of downloading the Sun JDK and running it on Linux? It is very
easy to configure and use, and although slow, it is very reliable?
Yes, it`s true.
Even if you can't distribute
AR == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AR What about JRE? What about other java providers? Ehh, this is
AR without sense, there was a discussion about this long time
AR ago.
Just for my own curiosity, are there any Java 2 JVMs that -are-
redistributable? Blackdown? IBM?
Or
I don't think finger pointing, even to Sun, will help at
this point. We just need to figure out a way to work
around the problem.
Greetings,
I run java on my Debian box (since I am firm in my resolve to use no
other
Linux Distribution), and I follow the practice of downloading from
AR == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AR But it will be good to have this in debian dist. This and
AR others java lib, applications or systems.
It can't be in Debian, since it's not DFSG-Free.
If it can be legally redistributed with Debian, though, it can go in
non-free. And
Cris J. Holdorph wrote:
I have no trouble running Java on my Debian system. I download the jdk
from Sun, throw it in /usr/local and run. BTW, I do the same for Apache
and several other programs too. I appreciate Debian for the overall
OS and environment, but even if I was using Windows,
Evan Prodromou wrote:
AR == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AR What about JRE? What about other java providers? Ehh, this is
AR without sense, there was a discussion about this long time
AR ago.
Just for my own curiosity, are there any Java 2 JVMs that -are-
redistributable?
AR == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Me Just for my own curiosity, are there any Java 2 JVMs that -are-
Me redistributable? Blackdown? IBM? Or is the jdk-XXX-installer
Me method like the only way to make this work?
AR *2. License to Distribute Software. *Subject to
Evan Prodromou wrote:
AR == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AR But it will be good to have this in debian dist. This and
AR others java lib, applications or systems.
It can't be in Debian, since it's not DFSG-Free.
If it can be legally redistributed with Debian, though, it can go
Evan Prodromou wrote:
AR == Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Me Just for my own curiosity, are there any Java 2 JVMs that -are-
Me redistributable? Blackdown? IBM? Or is the jdk-XXX-installer
Me method like the only way to make this work?
AR *2. License to Distribute
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 06:53:02PM +0100, Artur Radosz wrote:
*2. License to Distribute Software. *Subject to the terms and conditions
of this Agreement, including, but not limited to Section 3 (Java (TM)
Technology Restrictions) of these Supplemental Terms, Sun grants you a
non-exclusive,
While IINAL I work for a company that has deployed Java applications running
under debian for several large Free Software Projects (pocketlinux, etc...) as
well as fortune 500 companies. Suns liscensing is basically ignorant and the
liability transfer clause probably isnt even legal. I for one
Stephane,
It is not Java that is non-free; it is Sun's implementation that is
non-free. Sun was very thoughtful about this sort of problem, and they
decided to not only allow but encourage clean-room implementations of
their Java platform. This prevents vendor lock-in, and it also allows one
to
What's needed is an install package, like for realplayer, that takes apart
Sun's rpm and puts together a deb and installs it.
Regards,
Alex.
---
PGP/GPG Fingerprint:
EFD1 AC6C 7ED5 E453 C367 AC7A B474 16E0 758D 7ED9
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GCS/CMCC/IT d- s:+ a16
Cris,
I used alien to convert Sun's rpm into a debian package, and
java-{virtual-machine,compiler}-dummy to provide for dependencies and Java
policy compliance. That way, I _can_ (and _do_) use jserv et al from
Debian packages.
Regards,
Alex.
---
PGP/GPG Fingerprint:
EFD1 AC6C 7ED5 E453 C367
Evan,
There's the free ones (japhar, kaffe, et al), possibly IBM's (but I've had
pretty unpleasant problems with IBM's JDK...maybe it's just
me..). Blackdown _is_ Sun's JVM ported to Linux.
Regards,
Alex.
---
PGP/GPG Fingerprint:
EFD1 AC6C 7ED5 E453 C367 AC7A B474 16E0 758D 7ED9
-BEGIN
Evan,
That presents a problem. Java itself is free, but Sun's implementation is
not. For this reason, forcing all packages which depend on
`java-virtual-machine' or whatever is pretty unfair. Packages that depend
specifically on Sun's implementation, however, belong in contrib.
Regards,
Alex.
Alexander == Alexander Hvostov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Alexander What's needed is an install package, like for
Alexander realplayer, that takes apart Sun's rpm and puts
Alexander together a deb and installs it.
There are debs for our Java packages (J2SE, JMF, Java 3D, JAI). See
Umm.. dudes..
deb http://ftp.linux.org.uk/pub/linux/java/debian potato non-free
(or http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux/mirrors.html to find your
nearest mirror)
--
Bob Ham: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pkl.net/~node/
IRC: 'node' on irc.openprojects.net: #slashdot ICQ: 4396425 'node'
The GNU
Nicolas == Nicolás Lichtmaier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm talking to Sun about a possible amendment to our license which
would allow our deb packages to go into Debian (non-free). Currently
I'm waiting for feedback from Sun's legal department.
Nicolás BTW, you are listed
Bob,
Congratulations, you just learned to h4X0R the Matrix. ;)
Regards,
Alex.
---
PGP/GPG Fingerprint:
EFD1 AC6C 7ED5 E453 C367 AC7A B474 16E0 758D 7ED9
-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GCS/CMCC/IT d- s:+ a16 C++()$ UL$ P--- L$ E+ W+(-) N+ o? K?
w---()
!O !M !V
* Artur Radosz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 10:27]:
Yeah, but with this solution there is no way to include other free java2
apzz and libs in distribution.
Artur, the problem is very simple. I hope I can explain it simply enough
for you to understand; while languages are often beautiful, english
Seth,
Sun did not license Java in a non-free manner. They licensed _their
implementation_ of Java in a non-free manner. Java itself is not subject
to a license of any kind, but just some straightforward IP protections to
keep people (like Micro$oft) from forking Java. Which is bad, for obvious
* Alexander Hvostov [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 19:49]:
Sun did not license Java in a non-free manner. They licensed _their
implementation_ of Java in a non-free manner. Java itself is not subject
to a license of any kind, but just some straightforward IP protections to
keep people (like
Hi, I hate to see a great people like you leaving. I haven't been
reading all other followups yet, so please forgive me if there's any
repeated message.
Therefore, I stop maintaining java-common (I will send an official ITO unless
someone steps in really fast) and the proposed Java policy.
* Alan KF LAU [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 20:32]:
Also one of the very annoying thing in kaffe bother me much is that it
has not implemented java.security. It is a mistake or an intention to
make Java insecure? See
http://www.kaffe.org/cgi-bin/kaffe/security?user=guest;addsignature=1
I think
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Seth Arnold wrote:
* Alexander Hvostov [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010301 19:49]:
Sun did not license Java in a non-free manner. They licensed _their
implementation_ of Java in a non-free manner. Java itself is not subject
to a license of any kind, but just some straightforward
Per,
I'm guessing this guy is one of those who thinks the only thing that can
be done with Java is a Web application (which, presumably, makes heavy use
of java.security.*). I think we should come up with a name for people like
that. Dot-communists? Dot-com-a-holics? Dot-com-iacs?
;)
Regards,
(followups set to debian-devel; please take this off of debian-java if
replying)
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 09:57:11PM -0800, Alexander Hvostov wrote:
I hope DMFR behaves differently, then, because I will probably miss
non-free. I have about a page worth of non-free software installed:
-
60 matches
Mail list logo
