[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Event class?

From: John Keiser
Subject: Re: Event class?
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 12:08:53 -0600

I know that Classpath's AWT works because I've seen screenshots of it ... I
don't know, however, how well it works.  I suspect the screenshots were made
by using Sun's Event class.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Shane Nay" <address@hidden>
To: "Tom Tromey" <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: Event class?

> On Thursday 10 May 2001 10:35, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > Shane> Q re licensing: I noted some stuff in the mailing list
> > Shane> regarding libgcj & classpath getting merged on occasion.  If
> > Shane> this is the case, how can their be a license collision?
> >
> > It isn't a collision, but rather the possibility of confusion.
> >
> > libgcj is entirely GPL+exception.  This includes the libgcj
> > implementation of java.awt.
> >
> > Classpath is mostly GPL+exception, except for AWT, which is LGPL (as I
> > recall).
> >
> > If we take classes from the libgcj AWT and put them into Classpath,
> > I'm afraid confusion will result.  I don't want to be in the position
> > of seeing classes from libgcj incorrectly relicensed and then having
> > to find historical evidence to make sure we can keep using them in
> > libgcj.  If that makes sense.  Maybe I'm too worried?
> >
> > I think eventually, once the libgcj AWT is finished, we can just
> > delete the Classpath AWT and replace it with the libgcj
> > implementation.  Or maybe the other Classpath developers don't want
> > that.  It is a negotiation for a future day which may never come --
> > especially given the pace at which the libgcj AWT has been advancing
> > lately.
> Yes, probably the case.  The GNUClasspath's AWT is/would take some serious
> work to bring it "up to code" as it were.  Even if it gets there, I see
> in there that's not in Java at all, and a ton of stuff missing.  Hmm,
maybe I
> should be working on libgcj... :).  Anyway, I'm going to mess around and
> what it would take to fix GNUClasspath's AWT implementation.  Possibly it
> doesn't even work, maybe that's even likely.  But I won't know till I work
> with it for a couple more days.
> The licensing stuff seems less of an issue.., but maybe it is.  Depends on
> how far along libgcj's AWT really is.  Since ours doesn't really work that
> can see, and theirs is "actually working", then the licensing issue is
> just make a tarball and stuff it on the site as "historical LGPL AWT
> implementation that doesn't really work" ;-).  But maybe it's not that bad
> all, and can be fixed.
> Thanks,
> Shane Nay.
> _______________________________________________
> Classpath mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]