Rick Hillegas wrote: > > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > >> I read Rick's note on the 10.2 licensing issue in an archive because of >> strange move to the user list, so sorry for the weird quoting : >> >> He said : >> >> "I must report today that the restrictions imposed by the beta JDK >> license have not been lifted. >> >> As you know, the JDK 6 beta license requires a disclaimer that bars the >> use of the code for any productive use.... >> >> snip >> >> ...For this reason, we, the Derby community must change our >> plan to ship imminently an official release of Derby that includes >> JDBC4." >> >> Let me start with a question : >> >> Why? Is this all about having a set of API jars to compile against, or >> is it something more? >> >> > Hi Geir, > > In a nutshell, yes. We can use the compiler from JDK 5 without any > licensing restrictions--for our purposes it's just as good as the JDK 6 > compiler. However, a restrictive beta license covers the apis in the JDK > 6 jars.
This reminds me of the old gag : "Doctor, my arm hurts when I lift it" "Don't lift it then..." Don't use the JDK 6 jars. All you need to do is *compile*, so lets make our own JARs that get things to compile. Is there any runtime dependency on Java SE 6? geir
