Alex Blewitt wrote: > On 14/08/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> 3) Clearly there's value in providing these [sun.* classes], as other >> implementations >> (BEA, IBM, Apple) include them. > > Possibly true, but for different reasons. They license the source code > bulk from Sun, not re-implement their own. (They have patches etc. > that sit on top of them, of course.) As a result, there's a bunch of > internal stuff that is exactly the same as Sun's, and so depends on > the sun.* classes.
Depending on their license choice, we'll be able to do that soon :) If they'd just hurry up... > > The value (to them) is that they don't have to spend time re-writing > the sun.* classes instead of something else. There's no value > necessarily to the end user; it's a selfish decision on their part, > nothing more. I agree with sentence 1 and 3 above, with s/selfish/pragmatic applied to 3. I'd also bet that IBM wouldn't do it if they could avoid it - I can't imagine they would ship sun.* unless there was customer demand. geir --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
