>I was actually trying to make a reference to the fact that I have not
>yet seen a mention of Red Hat in our discussions of who should be
>driving Java on Linux. Why is that?
Or VA Linux? :-)
Sadly, I don't think many people at Red Hat care about Java. There's
this funny anti-Java sentiment in t
A strong opinionated colleague of mine said the following:
> > RedHat have revenues of $10m -- and are capitalized on the NASDAQ
> > at -- ready for this -- $20 billion -- they're worth one fifth of
> > what Gates is worth.
> >
> > These guys should stop bleating and start demanding that RedHat
I was actually trying to make a reference to the fact that I have not
yet seen a mention of Red Hat in our discussions of who should be
driving Java on Linux. Why is that?
Jim
Tony Dean wrote:
>
> Jim,
>
> There is such an organization. Its called the Opensource movement. You
> only
> have to
Dimitrios,
Dimitrios Vyzovitis wrote:
Tony Dean wrote:
> I presented a paper on using JNI with Linux at
the Atlanta Linux
> Showcase and the feedback
> ran from one guy telling me this was exactly what he needed to someone
> else wanting to
> rewrite the entire Java class library with JNI and
Jim,
There is such an organization. Its called the Opensource movement. You
only
have to look as far as Linux to see the potential. Linux is more stable
and generally
performs better than Win NT and there is plenty of resources behind
NT. look at Perl and
gcc/g++ to see what can happen. The Opens
> ...
> But there's an awful lot of evidence that
> mounting a serious Java environment effort is not really possible
> without the financial resources to feed and clothe a small army of
> full-time developers.
>
> Nathan
If only there were a Linux organization/corporation with those kind of
fi
Since Kaffe came up on this list, let me add a few comments about it:
>
> Kaffe is a clean room implementation to the spec but they have expanded the
> language in some interesting ways. I seem to recall they used the MS alternative
> to JNI but maybe they put in JNI as well.
Kaffe fully supp
Tony Dean wrote:
>
> Nathan,
>
> It is a bit daunting and possibly impossible as there is enough gray
> area in the spec
> as to implement a language that is not capable of passing the Java
> validation suite of tests and
> that is the only thing I can think of that could be used to verify the
>
Tony Dean wrote:
> Of course once we enter the standards process we can do anything from
> start with
> a clean sheet of paper up to (more or less) Java.
>
> I presented a paper on using JNI with Linux at the Atlanta Linux
> Showcase and the feedback
> ran from one guy telling me this was exactly
Nathan,
It is a bit daunting and possibly impossible as there is enough gray
area in the spec
as to implement a language that is not capable of passing the Java
validation suite of tests and
that is the only thing I can think of that could be used to verify
the user has implemented
the spec. (hmm
Hi!
On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 Nathan Meyers wrote:
>Tony Dean wrote:
>> 1) Sun owns the Java trademark. They have published the VM spec and
>> the language spec. They permit rogue ports from the specs.
>
>There is already an excellent "rogue port" in the Kaffe project,
>although "cleanroom implemen
Tony Dean wrote:
> 1) Sun owns the Java trademark. They have published the VM spec and
> the language spec. They permit rogue ports from the specs.
There is already an excellent "rogue port" in the Kaffe project,
although "cleanroom implementation" is a better term. Interestingly,
even the sp
Nelson,
There are a number of possible scenarios that your comments could blossom
into.
Nelson Minar wrote:
There are deeper problems lurking underneath, though, having to do
with Sun's control of Java. Sun isn't interested in the ultimate goals
of free software, and they're powerful enough to
"a b" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I wonder what would happen if any of the Blackdown developers had put a GPL
>license in any part of their code fixes?
If Blackdown had GPLed their patches, then any code that incorporated
them would be GPL as well.
I believe that Blackdown did not have the optio
a b wrote:
> Hi
>
> I wonder what would happen if any of the Blackdown developers had put a GPL
> license in any part of their code fixes?
>
> How would that affect Sun's Community Source license?
Aparat from the fact that such an act is illegal according to the
non-commercial license agreement,
15 matches
Mail list logo
