2008/12/23 Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx>: > Andrew John Hughes wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> What shall we do with the copy of gcjwebplugin that still remains in >> GNU Classpath? Given that development has since shifted to IcedTea, >> and then been abandoned altogether in favour of the new IcedTeaPlugin, >> I don't see any advantage in maintaining this in GNU Classpath. I do >> see a disadvantage in that we know it has significant security issues >> and bugs. My preference would be to remove it before releasing 0.98. >> If we still want to ship a plugin with Classpath, we could possibly >> include IcedTeaPlugin. >> >> Thoughts? > > a. Would it work? > b. Do we have copyright assignment for all of it? > > Andrew. > > I've just tried to compile IcedTeaPlugin's Java code using Classpath and this fails due to dependencies on Sun's X11 code. We'd need to change that should we want to include it. As to copyright, part of the plugin is clearly marked as copyrighted to Red Hat and thus falls under the blanket assignment. Some of the other files have no copyright header (AppletSecurityContextManager,PluginCallRequestFactory, PluginClassLoader, PluginDebug, PluginException, PluginMessageConsumer, PluginMessageHandlerWorker, PluginStreamHandler, RequestQueue) and one is copyrighted to Sun (PluginAppletViewer). I also noted a lot of warnings from ecj - some of the Java code is very messy :) There are probably other issues, that was just the obvious failure. I guess the issue of a missing security manager would still remain, and that's still my main reason for suggesting we drop the plugin from GNU Classpath. I suppose that was my main question and IcedTeaPlugin was an afterthought; do we want to continue support something with known security issues and bugs? -- Andrew :-) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://openjdk.java.net PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net) Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
