Re: [Japi] Re: [Fwd: Re: Interesting discoveries playing around with japitools]

[Stuart Ballard <st...@gmail.com>]

On 11/9/06, Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sometimes some climbers manage to get to the other side to find that
> some people are very welcoming and appreciative of cultural differences
> while others not so much.

Ok, wow, this whole subthread is kind of what I meant by the politics
being scary.

I think we can all agree that among the Classpath devs and among the
Harmony devs there's plenty of goodwill in theory but also a fair
degree of disillusionment that the hoped-for level of cooperation
wasn't able to materialize.

But improving Japitools and having a better understanding of what it
does and doesn't do is in the best interests of both projects - and
other projects that might want to use it.

Japitools isn't affiliated with Classpath btw, I had Classpath in mind
when I originally developed it, yes, and it's GPL licensed because I
have a mild preference for that license, but I don't feel strongly
about it. One of the reasons I started a Japitools list in fact was to
try to have some neutral ground for discussions to avoid any
perception (or, even worse, reality) that Harmony had any kind of
second class status.

While I admit that coming from the Classpath side of the fence
originally, I have mixed feelings about whether the licensing
differences were actually worth starting a whole separate project for.
But Harmony exists and I hope it succeeds, just as I hope Classpath
succeeds. More interoperable implementations can't hurt. And the
"interoperable" part is where Japitools comes in.

So can we all play nice? ;)

Stuart.
-- 
http://sab39.netreach.com/

Re: [Japi] Re: [Fwd: Re: Interesting discoveries playing around with japitools]

["Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@pobox.com>]

Stuart Ballard wrote:
> 
> Japitools isn't affiliated with Classpath btw, I had Classpath in mind
> when I originally developed it, yes, and it's GPL licensed because I
> have a mild preference for that license, but I don't feel strongly
> about it. One of the reasons I started a Japitools list in fact was to
> try to have some neutral ground for discussions to avoid any
> perception (or, even worse, reality) that Harmony had any kind of
> second class status.

For what it's worth, I don't care that it's under the GPL, and I don't 
care where it's hosted, or what community it's associated with.

I'm really glad that you create the program, and really appreciative 
that you generously spend your time also analyzing the harmony code base.

I think of Japitools as one of the first bridges between the two 
communities, and it's encouraging for me that it's there and thriving.

> 
> While I admit that coming from the Classpath side of the fence
> originally, I have mixed feelings about whether the licensing
> differences were actually worth starting a whole separate project for.
> But Harmony exists and I hope it succeeds, just as I hope Classpath
> succeeds. More interoperable implementations can't hurt. And the
> "interoperable" part is where Japitools comes in.

Agreed - more open source java is good!

> 
> So can we all play nice? ;)

Yes :)

> 
> Stuart.