Doh - sent this to Aaron instead of to the list - let's try again...
Stuart.
--- Begin forwarded stuff... ---
"Aaron M. Renn" wrote:
>
> So what does this mean? It means we are very close to having 1.1 completed.
> Once java.util.zip and java.security are done - which will hopefully be
> soon - we will have a complete 1.1 runtime library (with a lot of 1.2
> functionality) ready to go with the exception of the seldom used RMI
> portion.
There is one aspect of 1.1 compatibility which, if resolved, would mean
that I could use Classpath for at least development of a project I am
working on in "real world" work. This project uses serialization between
an applet and a servlet. Classpath could handle the server side with no
problems in a development situation - except that our classes are
serialization-incompatible with Sun's. If we could get this resolved,
I'd be one happy real-world tester of Classpath. And if I were using it
in work, the company might be favorable to letting me put some time into
Classpath development. For my part, if I ever get any actual time on my
hands, I'm going to try to get this into the collections stuff in
java.util.
> Here is how I would like to see us proceed. Basically, once we get those
> two packages in and Japhar puts out another release that works with us, I
> want to release Classpath 0.01. This should be usable for all non-AWT
> applications. From there, I want to start banging on it hard with whatever
> we can find and focus on stability and filling in the holes in our
> implementation. Horrible performance problems should also be fixed if they
> exist (and they do in at least two instances). With the 0.01 release (and
> perhaps some fixes on top of that) hopefully we can start have people other
> than the developers work with this stuff. This will hopefully find more
> bugs, make us more robust, etc. The AWT will be migrated into this when it
> is completed. Ditto for RMI.
Sounds good. FWIW, I think that RMI will be important to us in the long
term, especially with RMI-IIOP. If possible, I'd like to see our
implementation be coded with the IIOP protocol in mind, because it's set
to become more and more important, with EJB on the horizon which uses it
throughout.
> In short, I would like to concentrate on putting out a high quality 1.1
> release before taking on too much of 1.2. Let me know what you all think of
> this.
I agree, with the obvious proviso that anyone who wants to work on
missing 1.2 functionality won't be turned down. I know that's obvious -
I just want to make sure we don't discourage any possible contributors!
:)
> If there are other people/things I have left out, I apologize. Please speak
> up. (I know I did not mention the servlet implementation for example).
Is this officially available as part of Classpath yet, btw?
Stuart.
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Aaron M. Renn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/
