I'm currently of the opinion that javax packages should not be
included into Classpath.
I'd like to get some feedback from other people on how they feel about
this issue.
Classpath is the Java equivalent of C's libc. We're a very large
package, and we're getting larger by the day. I see a rather
significant maintenance problem developing if we were to include the
javax packages into our distribution. I tend to think of the issue as
being the same as having 3 or 4 maintainers for all of GNU's
libraries.
The authors of the javax packages should be the primary maintainers,
and the easiest way to allow that to happen is to make the libraries
separate from Classpath. I don't want to be responsible, in any way,
for maintaining the javax packages -- I already have enough code to
look after.
Having the javax packages be separate from Classpath shouldn't hurt
anyone. The Classpath maintainers need not worry about having to
maintain a few extra hundred thousand lines of code (especially if one
of the authors of an extension falls off the face of the earth), and
the maintainers of the javax packages can be more autonomous. Simply
having our web site link to free implementations of the javax packages
should be sufficient.
Of course, if any of the authors would like for their packages to fall
under the FSF umbrella, they'd be able to create a setup much like
what Classpath has (cvs/web/mailing lists).
--
Paul Fisher * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
