On Saturday 10 July 2004 20:58, Dalibor Topic wrote:
Yes, in fact integrating Rob's code will be quite a major effort. Wonka has a different object layout (we don't use handles), different stack layout, and our data structures for classes, methods etc. don't resemble Kaffe's any more than coincidentally. So any Kaffe-dependent code in the version Rob gave me is just noise.
Yeah, that's what I thought.
I like the GPL quite a bit, myself. With that out of the way, I'd be willing to relicense my own changes under a license that made sure that I'd be still able to re-merge improvements back into kaffe. While GPL guarantees that, that's unfortunately not helpful for Wonka. So, how about GPL+linking exception, a la GNU Classpath? Would that be ok for Chris?
In this case I think it would be OK. I have a query outstanding with the FSF about the Classpath licence, because I'm not too sure I know what constitutes an "independent module" in Java. The verifier is an easier case, in that we just have to agree amongst ourselves that other components of the VM (class loader, interpreter, ...) are to be regarded as "independent". This would need to be stated in the exception clause, as it's not obvious.
Okay, please keep us updated on how FSF interprets GPL+linking-exception . I, personally, regard the interpreter as largely [1] "independant" from the rest of the VM, which was part of the reasoning why I moved it into its own directory, away from the rest of kaffe core vm.
cheers, dalibor topic
[1] Well, it has to interface *somehow* with the runtime in a runtime dependant way :) But that's going to be different for each runtime, unless we agree on a verifier API, so that we can interchage Rob's verifier, with, for example Tom's, or JustICE from BCEL. Stuff for the next Classpath hacker meeting :)
_______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
