Ooops. Should have put this on the list.
> I don't believe this is a good way to go about it. It would make more
> sense for the VM specific stuff to be shipped with the VMs. If we
> ship the VM specific stuff, then we might have to do a new release of
> Classpath anytime a new version of a VM is released.
>
> Maybe a better idea would be to create a package called "gnu.vm" in
> the Classpath distribution. The package would consist of all the
> interfaces which a particular VM would need to implement in order to
> support Classpath.
>
> thoughts?
>
> I hear what you are saying about shipping vendor specific stuff but I
> would suggest that we take a peer type approach. That way we could have
> a gnu.vm.* with the interfaces and a gnu.vm.yourarchhere.* for each vm
> that is supported.
>
> Maybe we could even get the vendors to provide their packages *LOL*.
>
> Blaine
>
>
