Hi,
On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 07:07:11PM -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> Are you referring to companies which make embedded projects using
> libgcj? Yes, it's true -- they use libgcj (and thus parts of
> Classpath) and don't redistribute source. RMS was aware of this when
> he agreed to relicense the bulk of Classpath. In fact, I believe it
> was one of the more important things he considered in making his
> decision.
>
> Obviously you think this tradeoff isn't worth it. I disagree. I
> think the Classpath/libgcj merger has been a net plus for Classpath.
> libgcj hackers (*definitely* not limited to people at RH) have made
> many improvements to Classpath.
Although I agree with Etienne on the fact that I do not feel very
comfortable with people distributing parts of Classpath without
redistributing sources. I also agree with Tom that the tradeoff has been
very beneficial in creating more free software and making the Classpath
project of a much better quality. And I do want to thank all libgcj
hackers that made that possible.
Cheers,
Mark
--
Stuff to read:
<http://www.toad.com/gnu/whatswrong.html>
What's Wrong with Copy Protection, by John Gilmore
_______________________________________________
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
