ant elder wrote:
> I've just noticed this reply from Geir isn't on the bsf-dev mail archive
> even though it was copied to the bsf-dev list, so i'll fwd it here now.
Great, thank you!

> Must have been a bit confusing for those trying to understand the
> thread :)
:)

>>
>> You can release.  You just can't claim that it's a compatible
>> implementation.  I think that just clearly marking it - say, maybe a
>> note in the readme that says "This software hasn't been tested with
>> the xxxx TCK, and therefore isn't a compatible implementation of JSR-
>> XXX"
>>
>> should do the trick
Well, from a *technical* point of view it should be at least a
*compliant* implementation.

Wouldn't it be enough to declare that BSF3 was developed according to
the JSR-223 specs, but has not yet been tested via the xxx TCK for
official compatibility?

---rony


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to