FW: [Patch #11] Fix java.lang.Boolean to be immutable
Which commits list is official? Attached is the message savannah sent me after updating a patch, and it sent to classpath-commits. But looking at mail.gnu.org, the CVS changes are tracked on commit-classpath. It doesn't make much sense to have two commits list. By the way, I think that the name classpath-commits is nicer than commit-classpath when it comes to searching the mail.gnu.org index, because it is easier to find all classpath related lists if they are adjacent alphabetically. -- Eric Blake, Elixent, Castlemead, Lwr Castle St., Bristol BS1 3AG, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel:+44(0)117 917 5611 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 July 2001 09:18 To: ebb9 AT email DOT byu DOT edu; shalom AT gnu DOT org; classpath-commits AT gnu DOT org Subject: [Patch #11] Fix java.lang.Boolean to be immutable Patch #11 has been updated. Project: Category: None Status: Open Summary: Fix java.lang.Boolean to be immutable Follow-Ups: Date: 2001-Jul-18 01:18 By: ericb Comment: Committed on July 17, so this patch can be closed. (This comment is a test of the commit-classpath mailing list as well). --- --- For more info, visit: http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?func=detailpatchpatch_id=11group_id=85 ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: FW: [Patch #11] Fix java.lang.Boolean to be immutable
Eric Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Which commits list is official? Attached is the message savannah sent me after updating a patch, and it sent to classpath-commits. But looking at mail.gnu.org, the CVS changes are tracked on commit-classpath. It doesn't make much sense to have two commits list. By the way, I think that the name classpath-commits is nicer than commit-classpath when it comes to searching the mail.gnu.org index, because it is easier to find all classpath related lists if they are adjacent alphabetically. Based on the footer from the mailing list, classpath-commits is the old name of an alias we used for commits before it was a true mailing list. The mailing list name follows convention (maybe?) and is the other way around. Basically either work. Brian -- Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
mini vote
I'm interested in finding out if the majority of developers would like to see the AWT placed under the same license (GPL + exception) that other Classpath libraries are licensed with. If you think the AWT library should use the same license, reply with some form of Yes and otherwise respond with No. Additional comments on why you feel one way or the other are welcome. Brian -- Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: mini vote
Brian Jones wrote: I'm interested in finding out if the majority of developers would like to see the AWT placed under the same license (GPL + exception) that other Classpath libraries are licensed with. If you think the AWT library should use the same license, reply with some form of Yes and otherwise respond with No. Additional comments on why you feel one way or the other are welcome. Not sure if I count because I think all code I ever wrote for classpath has been removed in the merge, but FWIW, Yes. If I understand RMS' logic right, it goes something like Transvirtual's business model relies on having the AWT under the GPL so they can sell proprietary licenses to people for whom the GPL is unacceptable. Transvirtual has been good to the free software community, so we don't want to interfere with their business model. Personally, I don't think that just because a company has been good to free software entitles them to a perpetual non-compete agreement from the rest of the community - should we all quit working on GNOME because Troll Tech have been good to the free software community[1]? Stuart. [1] Belatedly, perhaps, but GPLing Qt certainly counts as good in my book. ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: another bug
Hi, more bugs, changed the LOADING, COMPLETE, etc from private to protected inside java.awt.MediaEntry since they we're accessed inside java.awt.ImageMediaEntry R. ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
RE: small bug
Call me a miminalist, but this version does the same as your proposal with
less source and less bytecode:
public Object[] getSelectedObjects()
{
return state ? new Object[] { getLabel() } : null;
}
Of course, this is taking your example out of context (I haven't looked at
AWT, and your patch isn't in unidiff). You should consider resubmitting
your proposed patch in unidiff format against CVS; that makes it a lot
easier to apply.
Aha - before I sent this reply you posted another bug. Yes, synchronized
classes are illegal. Someone has probably been committing to CVS without
compiling (shame on them)...
--
Eric Blake, Elixent, Castlemead, Lwr Castle St., Bristol BS1 3AG, UK
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel:+44(0)117 917 5611
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of R.S. Veldema
Sent: 18 July 2001 16:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: small bug
Hi, im giving classpath's awt a go with my compiler,
so checked a version out.
One bug discovered thusfar:
CheckBoxMenuItem.java: getsel-objs.
should be
public Object[]
getSelectedObjects()
{
if (state == false)
return(null);
Object[] obj = new Object[1];
obj[0] = getLabel();
return(obj);
}
___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: mini vote
On 18 Jul 2001 09:49:47 -0400, Brian Jones wrote: I'm interested in finding out if the majority of developers would like to see the AWT placed under the same license (GPL + exception) that other Classpath libraries are licensed with. If you think the AWT library should use the same license, reply with some form of Yes and otherwise respond with No. Additional comments on why you feel one way or the other are welcome. Brian Yes. Make it under the same exception. I understand the reason now that Stuart has reminded me; but not having it under the same license is now causing actual hindrance to the project. It's not worth that. --John ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: small bug
R.S. Veldema ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Hi, im giving classpath's awt a go with my compiler, so checked a version out. One bug discovered thusfar: Fixed. Thanks for the report. -- Aaron M. Renn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/ ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
[patch] for ImageMediaEntry
Hello. This is a patch to compile java.awt.ImageMediaEntry regards. Takashi Okamoto classpath.patch
