Hi,
Mark Wielaard wrote:
[Per/Julian could you take a look at this and give your opinion on gnu
bytecode/gjdoc?]
On Wed, 2006-03-29 at 12:20 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
I think moving stuff to a separate module was probably a mistake, in
retrospect. I'd like to propose moving the remaining tools back into
classpath, this time into the tools/ directory, which IMO is working
well for us.
Ideally we would also move gjdoc as well.
Comments? Objections?
I don't have a strong opinion on this issue since I'm not very involved
in the Classpath building and packaging process. If there are
compelling reasons for moving gjdoc to the main tree, let's do it. If
there are no (significant) advantages however, I'd say that keeping
gjdoc in a separate tree can't hurt as it allows people to build it
independently of Classpath, even if that's an option only few people
would make use of.
Regarding the ANTLR dependency, I wouldn't have the time to modify the
code to use Jay if that was a necessity. But if I understand correctly,
the consensus seems to be that ANTLR is preferable anyway.
As for changing gjdoc's license to GPL+exception, I don't take issue
with that - actually I would welcome this move regardless of where the
source code is located.
Cheers,
Julian
