Re: KopiSusu beta release

[Erwin Bolwidt]

On 16 Mar 2001, Brian Jones wrote:

> Erwin Bolwidt <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > With the help of Mark Wielaard it has shown to compile the Classpath
> > library right. Since I didn't get Japhar correctly installed, and the
> > Classpath configure script seems to insist on japhar even with
> > --with-japhar=no
>
> Yeah yeah... It's on my todo list.  I'll accept patches!
Well, it wasn't exactly a criticism. I just wondered why this is and if
I'm making the error or the configure script.

> > It's still a beta release until I'm sure that it can stand most tests, but
> > those willing to try can download it from:
> >
> > http://www.klomp.org/KopiSusu/
>
> What is the reason for forking kjc to create KopiSusu?

I'll put it on the web page later today, you're not the first one to ask.
Here's the blurp I'm going to put on it:

What's the relation with KOPI?

In response to a question I received about the relation between KopiSusu
and KOPI, I'd like to say: I'm not sure how it is. When I started fixing
some bugs in the original KOPI 1.4F release, I wrote a bug report and
never got a response. That and the fact that the 'latest news' on the
website at  http://www.dms.at/kopi since may, 2000 led me to believe that
the project was dead. After a few bugfixes to KJC to  make it work for
another project, I became interested to fix other problems I encountered,
and after a while the changes accumulated into something that can
be properly called a new release.

A short while ago, I got in touch with Edouard Parmelan, who is/was
responsible for bug reports and extensions for KJC, and learned that there
are bugfix releases of KJC-1.4F at http://egp.free.fr/kaffe/
Unfortunately, I changed the code style. I use spaces instead of tabs,
braces of method and type declarations on a new line, and an indent size
of 4, and the order of member types, fields and methods  according to
Sun's code style. So it won't be easy to transfer patches from KJC-1.4F to
KopiSusu, even though many parts of the code have changedbecause of
refactoring and bugfixes.

So, although I didn't really intend to make a split, it could be considered
as just that. If somebody think this is a problem and has a constructive
solution, I'm all ears.


Erwin Bolwidt