From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23276 invoked by alias); 16 Feb 2006 17:34:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 23260 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Feb 2006 17:34:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (HELO xproxy.gmail.com) (66.249.82.193) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:34:18 +0000 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s13so115634wxc for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.117.9 with SMTP id p9mr1408138wxc; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.109.9 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:34:00 -0000 From: Stuart Ballard To: David Gilbert Subject: Re: Mauve license Cc: GNU Classpath , mauve-discuss@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <43F4AB1C.3000705@object-refinery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <43F4AB1C.3000705@object-refinery.com> Mailing-List: contact mauve-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: mauve-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q1/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 On 2/16/06, David Gilbert 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. =46rom 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/