On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 16:44 -0400, Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: > I propose that we build Jessie directly into glibj.zip. Having Jessie > present by default would be convenient both for GNU Classpath developers > and also for packagers.
I've spent the past few days dealing with US export control issues. Let me tell you something: it's a huge pain. Sorry for being so US centric (even though I'm Canadian) but I think we should consider US export control regulations carefully. See: http://www.bxa.doc.gov/Encryption/PubAvailEncSourceCodeNofify.html Among other things, I'm worried about the implications this will have for GCC. Putting Jessie in GCC via GNU Classpath will have implications for all GCC mirrors and distributors. It could potentially cause delays in rolling out GCC release (my understanding is that it can take 4+ weeks to get the right authorizations in place). Keeping Jessie as a separate module might be convenient from this perspective. Does the FSF have an opinion on this? I'm still talking to Red Hat legal about this. I'll report back as soon as I get a real opinion from them (FWIW). AG _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
