Re: Kaffe & Classpath

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian D Stewart <address@hidden> writes:

>> 2. Kaffe's java code is targetted specifically at the Kaffe VM. It's
>> TVT's commerical impetus (the embedded market) that feeds the design
>> of that library. Classpath has no such restriction.

Ian> Not to put too fine a point on it, but isn't the entire point of
Ian> distributing Classpath under GPL + Exception to allow Cygnus to
Ian> market it to the embedded community?

I think there is one very important difference between the Classpath
and libgcj licenses and the kaffe license.  With Classpath and libgcj,
"Cygnus" (now Red Hat) is not a favored company.  It is true that this
license was chosen in order to make it possible for then-Cygnus to
sell Java to embedded customers.  However, the FSF owns the code.
Anybody can enter into the same market that Cygnus (now R.H.) is in.
For an example of this, see Code Sourcery (this is in the C++ space,
but the theory is exactly the same).

On the other hand, TVT owns kaffe and licenses it publically under the
GPL.  This means that no other company can use their code on the same
basis that they do -- if you want an embedded kaffe, there is only one
place to get it.  Let me be very clear that I don't think this is bad.
I think TVT is free to do whatever they want.  But I do think it is an
important difference.

Ian> While this may not effect the design of Classpath (or at least it
Ian> doesn't appeared to have yet), it could be argued that the
Ian> licensing of Classpath is at least as important as the design, at
Ian> least as far as perception is concerned.

What perception precisely are you talking about?

Ian> All things considered, I would say that Classpath does indeed
Ian> have such a restriction.

Please explain what is restricted.

Tom