This is getting rediculous - I have described the issue to Sun - along with the exact way we are deploying the JRE, and we have confirmation (from someone to whom I was referred by Bill Joy, Sun's co-founder) that it is ok. She said "I don't think we care about what server the bits come from as long as to get the JRE from you the user also always get the freenet software". What more do you want, a blood oath from Scott McNealy?
Even in the worst case scenario, this at least gives us sufficient justification to go back to the old mechanism until Sun comes back to us and tells us we can't. This silly timidity is hurting this project by complicating the deployment process for this software, our users shouldn't need to know whether they have installed Java, nor what version it is. If you still have concerns, I will take personal responsibility for going back to the previous mechanism. Getting an ok from a Sun lawyer referred to us by the co-founder of the company is as good as it is ever going to get, and that's good enough for me. Ian. On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 09:55:12PM +0100, Dave Hooper wrote: > Hrm, did my earlier email not get through? I've already had contradictory > 'confirmation' from Sun that we CAN NOT host the java installer on > freenetproject.org. I do not have the mails at home but I can re-forward > them to devl, again, tomorrow if necessary. I think when we have a > contradiction from Sun's legal advisors we should stick to the safer of the > two situations, especially considering that the wording in you > 'confirmation' seemed to suggest that something other than what we're doing > is ok ... and didn't directly relate to what we /are/ doing ... > > d > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ian Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 7:40 PM > Subject: [freenet-dev] Windows installer > > > > We still have two versions of the windows installer despite my getting > > confirmation from Sun that our previous approach is ok. Can we please > > fix this as it is unnecessarily complicating deployment on Windows. > > > > Ian. > > > > -- > > Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ > > Weblog http://slashdot.org/~sanity/journal > > _______________________________________________ > > Devl mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -- Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ Weblog http://slashdot.org/~sanity/journal
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
