On Tue, 08 May 2012 06:19:10 +0200, Casper Bang <[email protected]>
wrote:
Let me try to be a bit more precise here. You can't very well write much
Java code, without needing to implement an interface or an abstract
class... or a lot of these actually. The AWT/Swing event system comes to
mind as one of the most obvious parts of the API where this is true. So
where would you draw the line... are we only allowed to implement
interfaces? Extend abstract classes? Where is this stated/formulated?
In the GPL+CPE license. It's very clear. You can link without any problem
to everything that is in the Java runtime, and that's what 99% of people
do. You can even take OpenJDK, fork it, change the API and redistributed
it under a new name and the same GPL + CPE license. No problems with the
copyright, maybe problems with patents (the old discussion about whether
GPLv2 protects enough or not). For these things you don't need Java to be
a open spec, just GPL+CPE. Then, you can write a thing from scratch, as a
"clean room implementation", and decide to call it Java (Google didn't) or
under a different name. Here it seems that there are various kinds of
problem and an open spec would help. But it's clearly a very different
thing, programmers using Java aren't concerned about an alternate
implementation of Java.
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
[email protected]
http://tidalwave.it - http://fabriziogiudici.it
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java
Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
