Le vendredi 06 avril 2007 à 13:45 +0100, Andrew Haley a écrit : > Nicolas Mailhot writes: > > Le vendredi 06 avril 2007 à 11:07 +0100, Andrew Haley a écrit : > > > Nicolas Mailhot writes: > > > > > > > > the consensus seems to be it's more efficient to wait for the > > > > actual Java 7 SUN GPL release than make gcj feature-complete enough > > > > for JBoss. > > > > > > Really? The consensus among whom? I wonder what that's based on. > > > > The consensus as expressed by the Fedora Java team on this list in the > > past > > I doubt it. I could only find one posting with the Google query > site://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/ jboss gcj > and that was from one "Nicolas Mailhot". Then it was on one of the other Linux & Java technical lists (fedora-maintainers, fedora-extras, fedora-devel-java, jpackage-discuss@xxxxxxxx). Java team members participate in many different public forums, and I won't pretend I track each of their messages. If you deem gcj ready for JBoss feel free to submit a set of JBoss packages. I certainly won't stop you. You can take the jpackage rpms as starting point (though now JBoss is Red Hat the submission should probably come from the JBoss division itself) -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
