On 31 Oct 2002, Brian Jones wrote: > So I'm pretty much of the opinion that Classpath's AWT just needs a > little TLC from someone dedicated to it for a while to make it > useable. Having JVMs without major threading issues will aid this > development. This is why I would personally develop the peers against > Sun's VM, if I had the time to devote to it. > > Acunia has almost officially made this offer, but because it would be > unlikely for me to get contributors to assign their copyright on > changes back to this corporation that may not be so benevolent in the > future (no guarantees) I'm inclined to believe we must continue > working on the current implementation.
Although The Boss is now back, I haven't yet cornered him to double-check this. However I'm sure that to get into our main source tree, code would need to be assigned to us, or at least released under a licence no more restrictive than BSD: anything else would need to be "quarantined" to prevent it from leaking into a BSD'd or binary-only product. IOW it would be an "external library" from out POV. > It remains a possibility that if Acunia's current AWT is dual licensed > in the manner Chris described that parts of this work could be > integrated as an external library to provide optional functionality in > Classpath's AWT. So inspection of their implementation would be > possible but no verbatim copying allowed into _our_ classes. We could > create a separate directory to place their library with an appropriate > README indicating this is not part of Classpath and when we compile we > could link this library without trouble. I hope this explains what is > meant by external library in reference to FSF projects. But if that is all you intend to do, isn't the current (BSD) licence good enough? Regards -- Chris Gray VM Architect, ACUNIA _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
