From owner-freebsd-java Mon Aug 27 11:50:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from yez.hyperreal.org (gate.sp.collab.net [64.211.228.36]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 183F937B40A for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:50:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brian@collab.net) Received: (qmail 55547 invoked by uid 1000); 27 Aug 2001 18:50:15 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Aug 2001 18:50:15 -0000 Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 11:50:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf X-X-Sender: To: Anthony Green Cc: Greg Lewis , , Subject: Re: Contributing... In-Reply-To: <000201c12f00$096e17c0$5be6b4cd@cygnus.com> Message-ID: <20010827113108.H53858-100000@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, 26 Aug 2001, Anthony Green wrote: > While I'm on the subject I'll complain about something that is really > troublesome. Some of the more recent specs from Sun (J2ME and others) say > something like: feel free to implement a cleanroom version of this spec, but > make sure you implement every single class and no more. What's not clear to > me is how rules like this play in the Open Source world. Does this mean no > intermediate releases with missing functionality? Do you have to be "closed > source" until it's all done? I suppose I'll have to go to Sun for > clarification, but opinions are welcome. Speaking as someone who's been dealing with this from the Apache side of things... it is incompatible with open source licensing. This is being addressed (and fixed, hopefully) within the Java Community Process. Brian To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message