On 2/16/06, David Gilbert <david.gilbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Free to use, free to redistribute, and since you'll never want to > combine Mauve with anything else, I can't see why the GPL is considered > a showstopper. Politics don't have to make sense ;) The logical conclusion of your statements, though, is that the GPL isn't actually making any practical difference. And if that's the case, what's the point of using it? > I think a more significant "problem" is practical: Mauve, which > predates JUnit, uses its own test harness and Harmony is using JUnit. > Integrating the two is a pile of work that you're not going to find > anyone willing to spend time on. I think we should just accept that > there are going to be two separate test suites, that will overlap in > some places. It's not that big a deal in the scheme of things. AIUI currently you couldn't integrate the two if you wanted to because JUnit is under a non-GPL-compatible license. Another reason why a Mauve license change would be a benefit. >From a practical point of view, if the license issues disappeared, it would presumably be easy enough to create a "junit" directory in mauve, have the mauve launcher scripts run both junit *and* the existing harness, pull the harmony tests into the new folder, everybody write new tests as junit tests, and gradually convert the old tests one-at-a-time over time. It wouldn't have to be a once-off "convert the world" operation. > We have those tests now, just in separate places. True. The current situation isn't a disaster. It would just be nice to get some cooperation in a place where, IMO, it clearly *does* make sense and the showstoppers seem to be entirely unnecessary. Stuart. -- http://sab39.dev.netreach.com/
