Re: [Sablevm-developer] Re: while building ant... and some other stuff

[Grzegorz P. <ga...@de...>]

W li=B6cie z nie, 11-08-2002, godz. 21:29, Etienne M. Gagnon pisze:=20
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2002 at 09:04:49PM +0200, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> > OK, I hope ant maintainer will join our conversation/efforts.
> > In case you didn't know why I started with ant - it is because _a lot_
> > of DFSG-free packages depend on it, and ant is still in contrib.
> > I belive this one with a few other packages from Apache (xml and more
> > general stuff) - once moved from contrib to main - can allow us to
> > move _a lot_ of Java programs to main.
> > Yes - that's another reason I am doing all of this...
> I see the need...  As long as you can be a little patient for the next
> couple of weeks, so that I terminate my Thesis, I will have more time
> to help filling the holes.
That's OK - I will surely not dissapear anywhere.

It will take a while to get for ex. ant into main but it's worth the
effort. However the first thing is to have good JVM with good classpath
that is available in debian. If we have this - we can start recompiling
stuff with jikes+sablevm+classpath and filling bugs (with patches)
on java packages that should be compiled with our "trio" and moved
to main.

Honestly - next big step forward would be swing implementation.
That would allow moving ArgoUML into main...
n/m - that's completly another story

> > It may be just oversight.
> Apparently not.  Look at the last messages of
> http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/classpath/2002-August/thread.html
Hmm... yes but it doesn't do any harm - really. It can be as well GPL.
I already added a notoice to copyright file.
If it's moved away from classpath - I'll quickly repackage it for debian
and we'll depend on it - I think.

BTW: Would it be possible to keep all the classpath as jar or .zip
file? would it slow down things much? I know it's on the bottom of
TODO file, but keeping all the classes uncompressed looks... strange.

Q: Is all the classpath treated as bootclasspath?

> They might be moved to the gjdoc project.  Aren't we annoying to every
> other programmer out there, by checking licenses...  Poor them, having
> to deal with us.  But, it's for The Greater Good (TM). ;-)
Yes, we are. But too much people are not really interested in licenses
and stuff and then it takes sometime _a lot_ effort to get somenthing
that can be legally used. been there, done that. It hurts.
We need to know we feel the ground since the beginning.

> > BTW: do you know if classpathx project(s) are already packaged for
> > Debian?
> I think not...  You'll accumulate lots of Debian Karma, maintaining
> such numerous packages!  (Yep. I even noticed about the existence such
> things;-)
I think they _may_ be needed when we start recompiling stuff with
free tools only. I won't be packaging things just to have them
packaged.

> > I thought about other thing too. Machines of all 11 architectures of
> > Debian are available to debian developers. To port sablevm to new
> > architectures you could become debian developer. Just a thought.
> Let me finish my thesis, and I might well join!
We have time. ATM I mostly need your assistance and discussion/mails
than any coding. We _do_ have time. Sarge won't release tomorrow ;-)


Regards

						GBP
PS: are you doing master's degree or PhD? or what?
'thesis' seems to be unclear - at least for me.

PSS: When we have some initial stuff moved into main - I'll make
an announcement on debian-devel and debian-java that people should start
trying sablevm and friends to compile their packages with free
stuff only. Maybe in a month or two...