On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 19:01:38 PM -0800, Bruce Byfield
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Johan Vromans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Caolan McNamara already replied with some technical details that
> >will make this argument moot in short term. The community seem to
> >have (almost) accomplished "what proprietary vendors seem unable or
> >not motivated to do."
>
> What if OOo used GCJ for the final build? That would immediately
> remove all free software objections.
Only if the Java *code* used in OO.o is and will remain 100% really
portable between GCJ and the SUN JRE, right? Can this be guaranteed?
How?
Note that I only want to know if, technically, my question makes
sense, not to bitch again about the licensing. My _basic_ problem with
Java in OO.o is not its license (although I _see_ it and other things
as a problem), is with the way this relationship is presented by the
developers.
Ciao,
Marco F.
--
Marco Fioretti mfioretti, at the server mclink.it
Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/
I love humanity, it's people I can't stand Linus Van Pelt, Peanuts
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
