Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On 2/24/02 13:45, "Micael Padraig Og mac Grene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do you really thing that C# is going to be a competitor to Java? That > amazes me. Do you guys work for Microsoft? Troll. .:..:.:.:::.:::...:..:::.::.::...:::x180:james duncan davidson -- To unsubscri

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On 2/24/02 01:28, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But my fear is that .NET might be even worse in the long run :/ I admit that I have fear and loathing of the .NET moniker and all that Microsoft is associating it with. But as far as the CLI and the class libraries, well, quite f

Re: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Darn...and I was saving that one for April 1 :-) >On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 09:43:05 -0800 Micael Padraig Og mac Grene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >Thanx, Andy. There have been such rumours! ;-) > >At 08:02 AM 2/25/02 -0500, you wrote: >>Yes! Actually Apache is funded fully by Microsoft and its all be

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Thanx, Andy. There have been such rumours! ;-) At 08:02 AM 2/25/02 -0500, you wrote: >Yes! Actually Apache is funded fully by Microsoft and its all been this >big farce.. We'll be close sourcing everything and handing it back to >Bill! Don't worry, Soon we'll have Microsoft leadership for the

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Yes! Actually Apache is funded fully by Microsoft and its all been this big farce.. We'll be close sourcing everything and handing it back to Bill! Don't worry, Soon we'll have Microsoft leadership for the whole group! -Andy On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 16:45, Micael Padraig Og mac Grene wrote: > Do

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 21:45, Micael Padraig Og mac Grene wrote: > Let's see: Microsoft is going to be a better deal in terms of open code > than Sun Microsystems? err ... you trolling ? guess so. > I guess since I am fed up because Sun won't let me have free rein with > their code, I should ball

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Let's see: Microsoft is going to be a better deal in terms of open code than Sun Microsystems? Hmmm? Guess I must have missed the banana boat on this one. I guess since I am fed up because Sun won't let me have free rein with their code, I should ballyhoo C#, which will be 100 times more re

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 18:29, Colin Chalmers wrote: > It's good to know your enemy but lets not talk Java into it's grave. Just > because MickySoft comes out with something to compete against Java people > seem to be taking fright and already talking about ditching Java for C# > thereby playing into

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

To build on what Micael said, It's good to know your enemy but lets not talk Java into it's grave. Just because MickySoft comes out with something to compete against Java people seem to be taking fright and already talking about ditching Java for C# thereby playing into Mickys hand. Has Micky got

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Do you really thing that C# is going to be a competitor to Java? That amazes me. Do you guys work for Microsoft? At 10:28 AM 2/24/02 +0100, you wrote: >James Duncan Davidson wrote: > > > > On 2/5/02 08:24, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > My position: give me a solid (p

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

You laugh... IT HAS BEEN PROPOSED!!! http://www.mail-archive.com/cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org/msg10094.html On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 15:20, Craig R. McClanahan wrote: > > > On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > > > Gosh, I think I'll have to write my own programming platform one day

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > Gosh, I think I'll have to write my own programming platform one day to > avoid all this. > I thought you already did ... you mean I *cannot* write device drivers and run them on Cocoon? Rats ... :-) Craig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

I keep telling you: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/ Get this guy to release it APL and then we can get up and go! :-) -Andy On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 04:28, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > James Duncan Davidson wrote: > > > > On 2/5/02 08:24, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > My

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

James Duncan Davidson wrote: > > On 2/5/02 08:24, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > My position: give me a solid (possibly GPL-ed) CLI implementation, a > > Java2C# porting tool, a BSD-licensed library of .NET classes and > > java-cloning classes and I say let's kiss java good

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On 2/5/02 08:24, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My position: give me a solid (possibly GPL-ed) CLI implementation, a > Java2C# porting tool, a BSD-licensed library of .NET classes and > java-cloning classes and I say let's kiss java good bye. Heh. You are ahead of schedule. I f

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002 00:03, Fernandez Martinez, Alejandro wrote: > I try to read carefully, maybe I don't understand everything. The Microsoft > shared-source license clearly states that the FreeBSD implementation is for > researchers and tinkerers. and what has that got to do with what got propos

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Hi Peter, > -Mensaje original- > De: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Enviado el: martes 5 de febrero de 2002 21:06 > > > -Mensaje original- > > > De: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > My position: give me a solid (possibly GPL-ed) CLI > implementation,

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 06:32, Peter Donald wrote: > On Wed, 6 Feb 2002 11:41, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > > > *if* there was an open, semi-stable platform then I am sure a fair > > > > > chunk of people would flock to it - especially if it is under a nice > > > > > license like MIT that both the

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> > > Become a strategist. There will always a need for people telling people > what they should do next. At least for people that does not read these > lists. ;) > Where do I sign? :-) I'm always happy telling people what they should do next ;-). -Andy -- www.superlinksoftware.com www.

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Wed, 6 Feb 2002 11:41, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > > *if* there was an open, semi-stable platform then I am sure a fair > > > > chunk of people would flock to it - especially if it is under a nice > > > > license like MIT that both the BSD and GPL people seem to like. > > > > > > BUT THERE WO

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Andrew C. Oliver wrote: >On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 11:24, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >>Jon Scott Stevens wrote: >> >>>on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> (snip) > >>They dropped the ball for java on the desktop: sun management decided >>that it will never happen: ther

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 05:20, Punky Tse wrote: > > > > "Hey look at all those angry developers! They must really love Java! Cool! > > That will get us some fun press!" > > > However, the way that you have been going about things doesn't help anyone > > or anything. Please try a new approach. > > >

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> > "Hey look at all those angry developers! They must really love Java! Cool! > That will get us some fun press!" > However, the way that you have been going about things doesn't help anyone > or anything. Please try a new approach. > > :-) > > -jon > all +1. But Kevin's attitude and courage s

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Thanx -- I saved the url. At 03:36 PM 2/5/02 -0500, you wrote: >If you liked that, you might also like >http://radio.weblogs.com/0101679/2002/02/02.html#a61 . On the other hand, >I wouldn't spend too much time at that site as it is filled with boring >stuff like Web Services. > >- Sam Ruby --

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

t; From: James Strachan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 1:29 PM > To: Jakarta General List > Subject: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved! > > > on 2/4/02 8:29 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jon Scott Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > on 2/5/02 5:16 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > OK... when you get SUN to Open Source Java you can walk around with your head > > high... Until then any effort that contributes t

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

on 2/5/02 5:16 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK... when you get SUN to Open Source Java you can walk around with your head > high... Until then any effort that contributes to this is a Good Thing in my > book. Kevin, I know this is hard for you to believe, but I know for a

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Kevin A. Burton" wrote: > > > Dont't sit back and do nothing. Sending emails to this list is just a waste > > of your time. > > Try to imagine what makes Sun officials worry more: > > - the guy who

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 14:47, Peter Donald wrote: > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 23:41, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 03:14, Peter Donald wrote: > > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > > > Are you upset at the way Java is being handled by SUN? > > > > > > > > > > Do

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 11:24, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > > > > on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I created the java-is-dead mailing list to address these issues. > > > > > > Note that this mailing list is a place to help fix thing

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

"Kevin A. Burton" wrote: > Dont't sit back and do nothing. Sending emails to this list is just a waste of > your time. Try to imagine what makes Sun officials worry more: - the guy who pushed java technology in the ASF since '97 and was so efficient with his java-lover friends that the ASF has

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> De: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Enviado el: martes 5 de febrero de 2002 15:09 >For those who don't know me and might perceive this as an endorsement, I >have worn Microsoft shirts to JavaOne (just ask Pat Sueltz), and NetScape >shirts to the Microsoft PDC (just ask Dick Hardt or the M

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Wed, 2002-02-06 at 09:19, Kevin A. Burton wrote: > Don't you want to change things? Sure. Just wiped the dust off my copy of K&R, "The C Programming Language". ;-)) Bojan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

>From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >In case you didn't notice, Sun might go out of business as soon as a >couple of years: if even Oracle says that bigiron is dead, Google and >yahoo run on huge though inexpensive clusters of pc clones, Dual G4 >machines are starting to beat the

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakarta General List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 2:19 PM Subject: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved! <...snip...> > Dont't sit back and do nothing. Sending

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > on 2/4/02 8:29 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Could someone explain the issue, especially with reference to JSR107 > > > (JCACHE). > > > > > > Aaron > > > > Yes. I'm on JSR 107

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > > > > on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I created the java-is-dead mailing list to address these issues. > > > > > > Note that this m

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

IL PROTECTED] (sorry about the duplicate link to J#) > -Original Message- > From: Fernandez Martinez, Alejandro > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 9:10 AM > To: 'Jakarta General List' > Subject: RE: Java is dead... but it could stil

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> From: Scott Sanders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Stefano, you are right on the mark as usual. As soon as a java2c# > porting tool is available, the hordes will probably be moving on... Actually, forget a porting tool. I want an open-source version of something like this: http://msdn.micro

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Micael Padraig Og mac Grene wrote: > > Sam, I always get a kick out of your droll submissions. Thanks for the > quiet humor, which always includes informational content and never is too > biting. Micael If you liked that, you might also like http://radio.weblogs.com/0101679/2002/02/02.html#a61

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 23:41, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 03:14, Peter Donald wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > > Are you upset at the way Java is being handled by SUN? > > > > > > > > Do you feel lied to about the fact that SUN is still keeping Jav

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Wed, 6 Feb 2002 04:09, Fernandez Martinez, Alejandro wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > > -Mensaje original- > > De: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > [...] > > > My position: give me a solid (possibly GPL-ed) CLI implementation, a > > Java2C# porting tool, a BSD-licensed library o

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Sam, I always get a kick out of your droll submissions. Thanks for the quiet humor, which always includes informational content and never is too biting. Micael At 01:55 PM 2/5/02 -0500, you wrote: >Scott Sanders wrote: > > > > Stefano, you are right on the mark as usual. As soon as a java2c#

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

on 2/5/02 10:55 AM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On the other hand the porting tool already exists. See > http://msdn.microsoft.com/visualj/jump/. Yet the hordes still remain. > > - Sam Ruby My favorite quote: "The Java Language Conversion Assistant has been developed independentl

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Scott Sanders wrote: > > Stefano, you are right on the mark as usual. As soon as a java2c# > porting tool is available, the hordes will probably be moving on... Doesn't need to be to C#. The bytecodes are language independent. You can write one class in Java, subclass it in VB, and call the re

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> on 2/4/02 8:29 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Could someone explain the issue, especially with reference to JSR107 > > (JCACHE). > > > > Aaron > > Yes. I'm on JSR 107 and I seem to be the only really vocal person there > about my needs. Brian Goetz cares as well, but isn't ne

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

General List > Subject: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved! > > > Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > > > > on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I created the java-is-dead mailing list to address these iss

RE: Re: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Most of the Mono Ximian crowd is in Boston IIRC. Give them a shout. Scott > -Original Message- > From: acoliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 8:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Re: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be sav

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Hi Stefano, > -Mensaje original- > De: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] [...] > My position: give me a solid (possibly GPL-ed) CLI implementation, a > Java2C# porting tool, a BSD-licensed library of .NET classes and > java-cloning classes and I say let's kiss java good bye. A

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Jon Scott Stevens wrote: > > on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I created the java-is-dead mailing list to address these issues. > > > > Note that this mailing list is a place to help fix things. The java-is-dead > > mailing list is for people who love Java bu

Re: Re: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

>On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 10:48:28 -0500 "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote. >Andrew C Oliver wrote: >>> >>> A few links: >>> >>> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/02/04/mono.html >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html >>> http://www.ximian.com/devzone/projects/mono.html

Re: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Andrew C Oliver wrote: >> >> A few links: >> >> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/02/04/mono.html >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html >> http://www.ximian.com/devzone/projects/mono.html >> http://www.gnu.org/projects/dotgnu/ >> http://www.halcyonsoft.com/news/j

Re: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> >Peter is correct. A few links (you can see my name in the first one): > > http://www.ecma.ch/ecma1/MEMENTO/TC39-G3.HTM > http://www.ecma.ch/ecma1/NEWS/NEWS.HTM > http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/dotnet/2002/02/04/mono.html > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23919.html > http://

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Andrew C. Oliver wrote: >On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 03:14, Peter Donald wrote: >> On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: Are you upset at the way Java is being handled by SUN? Do you feel lied to about the fact that SUN is still keeping Java proprietary even after they pr

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Here is the kicker. If java were opensource, Microsoft would produce a fork and so would IBM and etc.. Sun learned the wrong lessons from UNIX though so they'd never let this happen. Here is the bottomline: Let them fork, let the best one win. There are now 3 wide-spread use UNIXes: Solaris,

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 03:14, Peter Donald wrote: > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > Are you upset at the way Java is being handled by SUN? > > > > > > Do you feel lied to about the fact that SUN is still keeping Java > > > proprietary even after they promised us for *years*

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Ya'll are a bit harsh. You expect and old school unix server manufacturer to shed its evil ways (learning from the mistakes of unix divergence) and become enlightened over night. Java was WAY more then I would have expected from Sun. Lets not turn our chance to change things into a "Sun Sucks-f

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Kevin A. Burton > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 10:17 AM > To: Jakarta General List > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved! >

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

+1 "Kevin A. Burton" wrote: > > > Heck no. .NET/c# why would I want to use an even more proprietary thing > > > to get back at SUN? Heck no. > > ... hm.. this discussion could be on the list... buy anyway. -- Ted Husted, Husted dot Com, Fairport NY USA. -- Java Web Development with Struts.

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> The Open Source community would PASTE Microsoft if we could > develop the JDK > with our own rules. Paste SUN perhaps, M$ would just take their ball away and invent a new game. I'm very suspicious about M$'s attitude towards standardising their proprietary IP, they have one very good reason fo

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > > Are you upset at the way Java is being handled by SUN? > > > > > > Do you feel lied to about the fact that SUN is still keeping Java > > > proprietary

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jon Scott Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > on 2/4/02 9:53 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hmmn. So what is the significance? What does this mean for > > implementations? Could Oracle charge a fee, if they wanted, or preven

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Frankly Sun should learn from IBM model and start to sell services > instead of just software. They already sell services :) -- Arnaud, STE-Formations Informatiques, fapse, ULg, .BE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 11:38, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > Are you upset at the way Java is being handled by SUN? > > > > Do you feel lied to about the fact that SUN is still keeping Java > > proprietary even after they promised us for *years* that it would be > > standardized? > > > > Are you looking

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

Personally, I've always admired people that have the guts to write fast, secure and flexible software (e.g. Postfix) in C. Java is a trade off in many ways, some of which might be acceptable and some of which might not, depending on your current taste. My understanding is that GNU people are co

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

on 2/4/02 9:53 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmmn. So what is the significance? What does this mean for > implementations? Could Oracle charge a fee, if they wanted, or prevent > others from implementing it? What are the worse case scenarios? What > is the purpose (said, ac

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> -Original Message- > From: Jon Scott Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 12:29 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved! > > on 2/4/02 8:29 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

on 2/4/02 8:29 PM, "Aaron Smuts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Could someone explain the issue, especially with reference to JSR107 > (JCACHE). > > Aaron Yes. I'm on JSR 107 and I seem to be the only really vocal person there about my needs. Brian Goetz cares as well, but isn't nearly as vocal.

RE: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

: Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved! > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > > But before doing that, they could try to just put some importants API > like > > javamail, jta, jndi, jdbc2ext

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > But before doing that, they could try to just put some importants API like > javamail, jta, jndi, jdbc2ext back to OSS as they do for servlets. Nota, that > these APIs are mandatory to build and use the ASF Tomcat 4.0,

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jon Scott Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I created the java-is-dead mailing list to address these issues. > > > > Note that this mailing list is a place to help fix things

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

On Mon, 2002-02-04 at 16:58, Kevin A. Burton wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Sorry for the X-post. > Then don't do it. > I just created a new mailing list: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can sign up here: > > http://entropy.yi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

> The only people who can fix these things is Sun. This mailing list > sounds > like a black hole and these types of politics usually don't work against > Sun > (neither do online polls)... > > The way to get Sun's attention is to corner them into a hole and then > pound > on their head for a few

Re: Java is dead... but it could still be saved!

on 2/4/02 1:58 PM, "Kevin A. Burton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I created the java-is-dead mailing list to address these issues. > > Note that this mailing list is a place to help fix things. The java-is-dead > mailing list is for people who love Java but are *very* concerned. The only peopl