Re: a harmonious and inclusive community

2005-07-23 Thread Robert Schuster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >> And there are often interface design discussions on the classpath >> mailinglist, please monitor that list >> (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/). >> Andrew Hughes really worked hard to document our current interfaces as >> now published

Re: a harmonious and inclusive community

2005-07-23 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
On Jul 22, 2005, at 7:59 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi, On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 10:18 +0100, Tim Ellison wrote: It seems that all roads lead back to the discussion of licensing and philosophy. Even that has degenerated into name calling which is unhelpful for building a harmonious and inclusive

Re: [arch] VM/Classlibrary Interface (take 2)

2005-07-23 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr.
On Jul 22, 2005, at 5:01 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi, On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 05:53 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: We seem to be giving mixed signals here. Can we try to coordinate a bit more on the policies we want to have for this project? Even if we cannot agree on some things it would

Re: a harmonious and inclusive community

2005-07-23 Thread Zsejki Sorin Miklós
Mark Wielaard wrote: Please, please, please concentrate on the technical issues raised. Investigate all the technical proposals, the work done by all the groups that want to cooperate on this. Great! Let's let then the IBM guys to show us their class library / virtual machine interface (please

Re: a harmonious and inclusive community

2005-07-23 Thread Mark Wielaard
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 12:17 -0700, Martin Olsson wrote: > Mark Wielaard wrote: > > Almost every existing project has a problem with the Apache License just > > because it isn't compatible with the GPL. This is infuriating (to both > > sides!). > > I just joined the list so maybe I missed something

Re: a harmonious and inclusive community

2005-07-23 Thread Martin Olsson
Mark Wielaard wrote: Almost every existing project has a problem with the Apache License just because it isn't compatible with the GPL. This is infuriating (to both sides!). I just joined the list so maybe I missed something, but could you clarify what you mean here? See for instance; http://ww