Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-04 Thread Peter kovacs
Hmm I was not answering you. Should have picked Damian mal. The suggestion to use .net is to translate to c#. Or I misread. Sorry. Am 4. Oktober 2017 20:50:06 MESZ schrieb Marcus : >Am 04.10.2017 um 08:54 schrieb Peter kovacs: > >are you answering my mail or was this just a

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-04 Thread Marcus
Am 04.10.2017 um 08:54 schrieb Peter kovacs: are you answering my mail or was this just a random reply? I'm wondering as I don't see anything new in your mail. How relevant is Win 32 bit in future? 0,0 % Shouldn't we offer a Win 64bit in long run? Of course. Why move to C#? I do not

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-04 Thread Peter kovacs
How relevant is Win 32 bit in future? Shouldn't we offer a Win 64bit in long run? Why move to C#? I do not see the benefit. I would rather opt for a clean modern C++ library design with hourglass APIs. With that we can support all languages people want to use in an extention. And we reduce

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Marcus
Am 03.10.2017 um 22:26 schrieb Kay Schenk: On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote: On 10/3/17, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: Now what: 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences (GPL for JVM,

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Andrea Pescetti
Damjan Jovanovic wrote: 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us to? To answer my own question, we can't ship OpenJDK - according to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional "Apache

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Kay Schenk
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote: > On 10/3/17, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > > Now what: > > 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences > > (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Fernando Cassia
On 10/3/17, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > Now what: > 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences > (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us to? > 2. Drop Windows as a platform, since it's the only affected platform (*nix >

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Matthias Seidel
Am 03.10.2017 um 15:59 schrieb Marcus: > Am 03.10.2017 um 14:51 schrieb Matthias Seidel: >> It seems that Oracle pulled the 32-bit version of Java 9: >> >> https://twitter.com/mreinhold/status/912311207935090689 > > thanks for your finding. I think we have a new topic on our todo list. However,

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Damjan Jovanovic
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > Now what: > 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences > (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us to? > To answer my own question, we can't ship OpenJDK -

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Marcus
Am 03.10.2017 um 15:18 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: Now what: 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us to? of course this can be an option. But IMHO it's just a life extension. Somewhen in the

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Matthias Seidel
Option 1, 3, 4 could work. (I would prefer 1  for short term and 3 for long term) Option 2 is nonsense. Either way, I just wanted to inform the list about the fact... Matthias Am 03.10.2017 um 15:27 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: > Go for which option? > Or do you mean option 4 with the "Go"

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Damjan Jovanovic
Go for which option? Or do you mean option 4 with the "Go" language? On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Matthias Seidel wrote: > Go for it! ;-) > > > Am 03.10.2017 um 15:18 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: > > Now what: > > 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Matthias Seidel
Go for it! ;-) Am 03.10.2017 um 15:18 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic: > Now what: > 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences > (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us to? > 2. Drop Windows as a platform, since it's the only affected

Re: Java 9 32-bit

2017-10-03 Thread Damjan Jovanovic
Now what: 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us to? 2. Drop Windows as a platform, since it's the only affected platform (*nix users usually install distro OpenJDK packages so 32 bit OpenJDK