> I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and
you would do well to remember that.
I agree, no one owes anyone anything. That's why I'm trying to make an offer to
do the work at a cost or take the code and distribute under a different
license. I'm offering a business deal, not asking for charity.
> You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread.
Thanks for your help, enjoy your day
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018, 20:49:50 GMT, David Lloyd
<david.ll...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Ashton Hogan <ashtonho...@ymail.com> wrote:
> David, I understand that you don't use this feature of the JDK and that's
> absolutely fine. I'm not the type of person to impose my way of doing things
> on anyone. I hope that you aren't either. There are obviously many people in
> the community that DO love and use this httpserver for many reasons that I
> won't go into here as that is not the point of this discussion.
>
> IIRC JDK is backward compatible so highly unlikely that it's going to be
> removed.
The specification parts of the JDK are backwards compatible but the
HTTP server is not part of the Java SE specification; nevertheless,
even things that were part of the SE specification (CORBA, and the
other EE modules) have been removed for Java 11 so I wouldn't put all
my eggs in that basket.
> If you did find a way to remove it, I would also be open to having
> the source code donated to myself to refactor and rebuild under a different
> license. I'd be open to discussing this in more detail as well if need be.
I consider this unlikely as that's a question for the copyright
holders; however, you can fork this code even so, as it is available
under GPL+classpath as well as CDDL. Talk to your lawyer about
options, and I think you'll find you have several.
> Going back to the original discussion, you mention that points 2, 3 and 4
> are subjective. As per my original request, please do put forward your
> points of view so that they can be discussed in more detail if you believe
> that they are wrong.
No thank you; I am not personally interested in this code. I only
replied as a service to you, to help you understand the OpenJDK
community process a little bit better.
> Pragmatically speaking, the development can be done on your end to improve
> the JDK OR on my end at a cost. I'm open to either.
OK, sounds good.
> Please do try and stay on topic in future responses.
Ashton, I observe that you are not doing a great job at your first
engagement of an open source community. I don't really have any dogs
in this race, other than to maybe guide you a little bit, but at this
point I'd suggest you "check yourself". Coming into any community and
immediately making demands without any attempts to understand the
existing culture is not a great way to get started; you will only
alienate people (like me, now). I do not owe you anything, nor would
I think that any other OpenJDK community member owes you anything, and
you would do well to remember that.
You will certainly not hear from me again on this thread.
--
- DML
