From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13032 invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2012 10:43:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 13019 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Mar 2012 10:43:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from alpha.arachsys.com (HELO alpha.arachsys.com) (91.203.57.7) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:43:35 +0000 Received: from [86.188.240.37] (helo=[192.168.2.137]) by alpha.arachsys.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S7lg5-0007BF-3r; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:43:33 +0000 Message-ID: <1331721811.2573.0.camel@ladybug.local> Subject: Re: Which library implementation to use/work on? From: Chris Burdess To: Mike Hearn Cc: java@gcc.gnu.org Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 10:43:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact java-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-03/txt/msg00043.txt.bz2 Mike Hearn wrote: > I understand the reasons for this policy. However, as you are planning > on (eventually) replacing Classpath with OpenJDK completely, an > exception in this case would seem to make logical sense. The code will > end up not owned by the FSF no matter what. Well, no. The FSF will still own Classpath.