On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:32:19AM -0500, Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Hi Leo,
I started replying to your email, suggesting modifications to the ICLA
that would address my concerns. As this would probably lead to a very
long license thread, I erased it, and I am proposing a simpler solution.
I
FaeLLe wrote
Yes i figured it was Birelli's reference counting algorithm.
yes, remember that we followed Sun's spec, and it says on section 3.3:
RMI uses a referencecounting garbage collection algorithm similar to
Modula-3's Network Objects. (See Network Objects by Birrell, Nelson,
and
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 08:02:44AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 07:15:28AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Pulling out of the various threads where we have been discussing,
can we agree on the problem :
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:32:19AM -0500, Etienne Gagnon wrote:
I started replying to your email, suggesting modifications to the ICLA
that would address my concerns. As this would probably lead to a very
long license thread, I erased it, and I am proposing a simpler solution.
simple = good
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:40:10AM -0500, Etienne Gagnon wrote:
I seem to recall that you mentioned previously that if any part of
SableVM would move to be a part of harmony you'd prefer that the name
SableVM be kept...
This was in a private email discussion between Geir, Archie and me...
Stepan Mishura wrote:
On 3/22/06, Leo Simons wrote:
SNIP
In any case, the obvious answer to the question is that you can do it by
writing your implementation so that it is implementation testable in that
manner. This means not (or allmost not) using package-private access
definitions
Leo Simons wrote:
This was in a private email discussion between Geir, Archie and me...
Really? How do I know about it then? ...
Oh! Then, it's me that apologizes. Maybe I mentioned or implied this
wish in some other email without noticing it. Sorry for the
misunderstanding!
Cheers,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 01:12:33PM -0800, Leo Simons wrote:
Dalibor,
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:46:16AM -0800, Dalibor Topic wrote:
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:32:19AM -0500, Etienne Gagnon wrote:
5- The ASF provides me with an official, legally binding document,
signed by officers
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
5- The ASF provides me with an official, legally binding document,
signed by officers that have sufficient rights to do so, stating that
it will only sub-license (distribute, etc.) code contributed by SableVM
authors (can be identified specifically) and derivatives of
Dalibor Topic wrote:
5- The ASF provides me with an official, legally binding document,
signed by officers that have sufficient rights to do so, stating that
it will only sub-license (distribute, etc.) code contributed by SableVM
authors (can be identified specifically) and derivatives of
Sorry about the delay. Traveling.
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
I am proposing that we strictly abide by the advertised Apache Harmony
Contribution Policy at:
http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/contribution_policy.html
but, we add one additional condition that must be met by the ASF, and we
add an
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
simple = good :-)
:-)
In any case, if an ASF officer needs to sign legal paperwork that is
unlike anything the ASF has ever signed before, you'll immediately notice
a slowdown of all processes since all of a sudden things drop out of
internet time.
George Harley wrote:
I don't want an argument any more than the next person but ... I
completely agree with the above statement. If you can't test code by
going through the public API then how will the users ever get to
exercise it in the real world ?
The key is that we aren't
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Oh! I forgot to add...
I think that the reverse should also apply. I do not think that it
would be OK for current Harmony commiters to simply go and change the
SableVM code without discussing it on this list first. Their right to
commit obvious little patches and
Etienne Gagnon wrote:
Hi Geir,
b) hopefully an ICLA from each contributor
The ICLA rules are less restrictive than the Apache License rules:
2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this Agreement, You hereby grant to the Foundation and to
recipients of
Hi, All
This voting has been open for about one week, so I guess maybe it's time to
summary the results or so? Seems the result is exciting! and I'm going to be
ready to living with staffs like EnumE extends EnumE;-)
--
Paulex Yang
China Software Development Labotary
IBM
On 3/23/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Weldon Washburn wrote:
Now that JCHEVM licensing issues are resolved, I would like to find a
home for mods that make Harmony Classlib more portable. The files
are:
nio/src/main/java/com/ibm/platform/OSMemory.java
Weldon Washburn wrote:
On 3/23/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Weldon Washburn wrote:
Now that JCHEVM licensing issues are resolved, I would like to find a
home for mods that make Harmony Classlib more portable. The files
are:
nio/src/main/java/com/ibm/platform/OSMemory.java
Finally, I've built Harmony with [almost] all free soft
I've downloaded the following
MASM32 from masm32.com
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 SDK
Microsoft Platform SDK
Microsoft Visual C++ Toolkit 2003
I've get rid of Delayimp.lib, removing the following line
I've removed setargv.obj from rules.mak and it just works!
So all the soft was used is free.
Thanks,
Mikhail
According to Unicode standart 4.0 (since 3.0) interpretation of non-shortest
forms is forbidden for UTF-8. So if a byte sequence is not in table of
well-formed UTF-8 byte sequences then it is considered as ill-formed and
treated as error. Harmony follows Unicode spec. but RI doesn't. I didn't
find
21 matches
Mail list logo
