Re: mini vote

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi,

On Sat, Jul 21, 2001 at 12:18:43PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> 
> Should the Classpath AWT be relicensed?  Obviously we'd like to have a
> working AWT in libgcj.  But on the other hand it isn't worth it, to
> me, if it causes a lot of contention and bad feelings about the gcj
> project.  We'll eventually finish our AWT implementation.  It isn't
> entirely clear that changing the Classpath license would make this
> happen more quickly.

I should be more clear.

First I have to give a real answer to the question that Brian asked
since I saw that I didn't do that explicitly in my last message.
Yes, I think it is a good idea to get all of Classpath under the same
license. That way there is less confusion and we will be able to join
the libgcj and classpath versions. I do think that we would be able to
finish a free AWT implementation quicker that way. But joining the
versions could also be done by relicensing the libgcj part.

Secondly I should explain that I work on Classpath since I want to help
the GNU project to get a free standard library for the Java language.
I do this in my own free time. Personally I like the GPL more then the
LGPL and I like the LGPL more then the GPL+exception. I understand that
it is sometimes strategic to distribute software under less powerfull
copylefted licenses or even under non-copylefted (but still free) licenses.
I also think that we should be very carefull when we change licenses,
it takes a lot a time and energy to make the right decissions.

Lastly please understand that I do not oppose changing any license.
(Nor am I in any position to veto any such decision.) And I appreciate
everything that the gcj project gave us very much and I hope that you
can see that by the time and energy that I spend on trying to integrate
the two project as much as I can given my limited time.

Cheers,

Mark
-- 
Stuff to read:
    <http://www.toad.com/gnu/whatswrong.html>
  What's Wrong with Copy Protection, by John Gilmore