You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com> on 2006/03/20 20:20:30 UTC
[resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked
I've just removed the blocks on SVN and viewcvs as the claim has been
resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
I'd like to thank everyone involved for approaching this earnestly and
in good faith, working together to get this problem fixed.
As a benefit, we've built a bridge between our Harmony community and
members of the SableVM community, and I look forward to working with
them in the future.
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> All,
>
> The ASF has been notified by a third party regarding a claim of
> copyright infringement of the JCHEVM codebase.
>
> At this point, we have no opinion on the validity of the claim, and I
> will begin serious discussion with the third party immediately.
>
> As we fully respect the copyright and licenses of others, I have blocked
> access to the JCHEVM repository in order to stop any form of
> distribution of the codebase until this is resolved.
>
> This issue is related ONLY to the JCHEVM codebase. No other codebase is
> involved, and all work can project activity can continue as normal.
>
> Thanks for everyone's patience.
>
> geir
>
>
Re: [resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked
Posted by Enrico Migliore <en...@fatti.com>.
Hi Etienne,
>Hi Enrico,
>
>I have started a public discussion on the SableVM developer list, and
>also got in private contact with various SableVM authors (as most are
>very shy, when it comes to writing in English) to prepare a donation to
>the Harmony project. See:
> http://sablevm.org/lists/sablevm-devel/2006-March/000608.html
>
>
>
I read the thread you are referring to and kindly reported here an excerpt:
> Also, contributing the SableVM code base to Harmony would not mean the
> end of the SableVM project, far from that! It would simply lead to the
> following development model:
>
> 1- The day to day maintenance of the general usage virtual machine
> would be happen within the Harmony project.
>
> 2- The SableVM code repository would keep a synchronized copy of the
> Harmony trunk as a root for developing new features and doing
> research, and for development in sandboxes.
>
> Personally, I am quite excited at the opportunities.
I think that the opportunity, in terms of number of programmers involved
and knowledge share, that we all are facing is great.
>You (and all Harmony developers) are welcome to join the discussion. :-)
>
>Etienne
>
>
thanks :-)
>Enrico Migliore wrote:
>
>
>>wouldn't it be possible to unify Harmony and SableVM contributors'
>>efforts, in order to have just one JVM and one group of work?
>>
>>
Enrico
Re: [resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked
Posted by Etienne Gagnon <eg...@sablevm.org>.
Hi Enrico,
I have started a public discussion on the SableVM developer list, and
also got in private contact with various SableVM authors (as most are
very shy, when it comes to writing in English) to prepare a donation to
the Harmony project. See:
http://sablevm.org/lists/sablevm-devel/2006-March/000608.html
You (and all Harmony developers) are welcome to join the discussion. :-)
Etienne
Enrico Migliore wrote:
> wouldn't it be possible to unify Harmony and SableVM contributors'
> efforts, in order to have just one JVM and one group of work?
--
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
SableVM / Harmony collaboration (was: [resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked)
Posted by Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>.
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 06:18:28AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> >>I'd like to thank everyone involved for approaching this earnestly and
> >>in good faith, working together to get this problem fixed.
+100. I'm still amazed at how quickly and productively this has been
addressed. Way cool.
> >>As a benefit, we've built a bridge between our Harmony community and
> >>members of the SableVM community, and I look forward to working with
> >>them in the future.
> >>
> >wouldn't it be possible to unify Harmony and SableVM contributors'
> >efforts, in order to have just one JVM and one group of work?
Anything and everything is possible!
I like to think that most of us doing this open source thing pretty much
prefer to do things together where possible and I also like to think that
it is very much possible to do that in just about any way we can imagine
(there's just a "few" of these big legal humps to take, unfortunately).
> That's up to everyone involved, but I don't think want to make having
> "just one JVM" a stated goal, because people may want to do different
> things.
Also very much agreed. I /suspect/ that certifying something using the
sun TCK (so as to call it "java") is so much work and that it is so hard
to get a "full, production quality, general purpose" (whatever that means)
JDK that at some point the people interested in achieving /that/ are going
to all focus on pretty much the same codebase...but there is 'plenty of
room' to do different things too. We can agree on how cool it is to work
together, work together on lots of things, and see where we end up.
> My 0.02 is if the SableVM community wishes to come here, they are
> welcome. If they find that they can integrate JCHEVM and SableVM and
> all are willing, they are welcome.
Yup! Gotta love this open source thing. Everyone who wants to sort-of
follow the apache way of doing things is welcome to come and do stuff here,
and everyone who would really rather not can still take the code and use it
according to the terms of a rather liberal license. The way it was, the
way it is, and the way it will be.
> If someone shows up with another VM
> that we want to accept, they are welcome...
I heard some good stuff about the one Sun has the other day :-P
> At some point, we'll take a hard look at the VM we want to make the one
> we make as fast, stable, etc as Sun's or IBM's.
>
> Also, if we have multiple VMs, and w/ the Classlibrary they pass the
> TCK, I'd be happy to see multiple distributions if people want them...
Additionally I don't see a problem with having some distributions that
don't pass any TCK -- we'd just need to manage the legal stuff well and
make it very clear to everyone "which is which" and "what is what", but
there is no particular reason it can't be done if there's people who
take care of it. For example, I can definitely see us releasing different
parts as seperate distributions. I can imagine, for example, the
GNU Classpath project maybe wanting to run some of the class library unit
tests we have, and there is no particular reason we can't release those
seperately.
Just a few cents...
Leo
Re: [resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked
Posted by Etienne Gagnon <eg...@sablevm.org>.
I imagine that merging JCHEVM and SableVM could help building what I
would call a "reference VM" for Harmony. The reference VM would have a
stated goal of "robustness above all".
Some advantages of interpreter-based VMs are:
1- Simplicity of the code => less bugs, much easier to maintain.
2- High portability (given that some care has gone into it, of course).
3- Small footprint.
4- Can be used as a basis for a mixed-mode VM (e.g. adaptive system).
5- Using modern techniques, one can actually write efficient
interpreters. (They don't compete with the speed od adaptive
systems, yet they are fast enough for day to day usage on modern,
fast processors).
Etienne
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> My 0.02 is if the SableVM community wishes to come here, they are
> welcome. If they find that they can integrate JCHEVM and SableVM and
> all are willing, they are welcome. If someone shows up with another VM
> that we want to accept, they are welcome...
--
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
Re: [resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@pobox.com>.
Enrico Migliore wrote:
> Hi Geir,
>
>> I've just removed the blocks on SVN and viewcvs as the claim has been
>> resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
>>
> ok, good.
>
>> I'd like to thank everyone involved for approaching this earnestly and
>> in good faith, working together to get this problem fixed.
>>
>> As a benefit, we've built a bridge between our Harmony community and
>> members of the SableVM community, and I look forward to working with
>> them in the future.
>>
> wouldn't it be possible to unify Harmony and SableVM contributors'
> efforts, in order to have just one JVM and one group of work?
That's up to everyone involved, but I don't think want to make having
"just one JVM" a stated goal, because people may want to do different
things.
My 0.02 is if the SableVM community wishes to come here, they are
welcome. If they find that they can integrate JCHEVM and SableVM and
all are willing, they are welcome. If someone shows up with another VM
that we want to accept, they are welcome...
At some point, we'll take a hard look at the VM we want to make the one
we make as fast, stable, etc as Sun's or IBM's.
Also, if we have multiple VMs, and w/ the Classlibrary they pass the
TCK, I'd be happy to see multiple distributions if people want them...
geir
>
>> geir
>>
> Enrico
>
>
>
Re: [resolved] Re: JCHEVM SVN access temporarily blocked
Posted by Enrico Migliore <en...@fatti.com>.
Hi Geir,
> I've just removed the blocks on SVN and viewcvs as the claim has been
> resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
>
ok, good.
> I'd like to thank everyone involved for approaching this earnestly and
> in good faith, working together to get this problem fixed.
>
> As a benefit, we've built a bridge between our Harmony community and
> members of the SableVM community, and I look forward to working with
> them in the future.
>
wouldn't it be possible to unify Harmony and SableVM contributors'
efforts, in order to have just one JVM and one group of work?
> geir
>
Enrico