Brian Jones wrote:
> I'm not following Harmony too closely (so let me talk out my ... a
> moment) but let me see if I understand it so far. Harmony is:
>
> 1) Writing their own class libraries (based on email about japi
> comparisons)
> 2) Writing their own JVM (which I think is based in some part on one of
> the current JVMs, but ok, sure, everyone seems to write one eventually)
> 3) Writing their own test suite (because Mauve doesn't use junit and has
> a different license, but I think that's going to be fixed)
Here's a little bit more information re #2. I've donated an interpreter-only
version of JCVM to Harmony (called "JC Harmony Edition") under the Apache
license. Whether they'll end up using it or not, who knows.
IBM has donated a class library (called, unfortunately, "classlib").
There is an effort underway to "port" that class library to JCHEVM,
using the existing (Classapath-defined) Java/VM API. This effort has
seen some initial success. So in theory, if all goes well, any combination
of ("classlib" or Classpath) and (any VM that works with Classpath) will
run. This would be great if it can be achieved.
As for all the license stuff, I don't understand it all and don't care
strongly enough to follow the debate. I do think it's a real irony that
"free" software can't be packaged with other "free" software. I don't
in general like the idea of two "competing" class libraries nor two
"competing" test frameworks (the latter being especially stupid).
So #1 is not really true: they're not writing new stuff, they've just
accepted a pre-existing donation. They believe they can't just use
Classpath for license reasons (this part I don't fully understand).
Re #3 I've not been following it.
-Archie
__________________________________________________________________________
Archie Cobbs * CTO, Awarix * http://www.awarix.com
