Re: GNU Classpath 0.14 released

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Etienne" == Etienne Gagnon <address@hidden> writes:

Etienne> You are avoiding the discussion on the main issue: the
Etienne> missing reference to SableVM in the release announcement.  As
Etienne> far as I can see: GCC/GCJ, Kaffe, JamVM, Jikes RVM, and
Etienne> Kissme are included, but not SableVM.

I replied to the part of the note that did not sit well with me.

I do agree that SableVM should have been mentioned.
I think we should go the egalitarian route and just list them all in
every announcement.  Then, I hope, nobody will be offended.

Etienne> *If* the argument is that SableVM developers do not
Etienne> contribute to GNU Classpath, then again, it is not true.

In this discussion this comes out of left field for me, though to be
honest I've heard this particular idea before.  I reject it, as I
think we all should.

Etienne> *If* the argument is political, it would be interesting to
Etienne> hear from GNU Classpath management.

In my opinion, management-ness is roughly the sum of one's
contributions and one's ability to convince the Classpath community
about direction.  Mark does have an official GNU position, but it
doesn't mean he automatically wins every argument.

Aside from that I don't believe there is any official "GNU Classpath
management".  Classpath seems fairly lax in this area compared to
other projects of its size.  By and large it seems to work though, so
I don't see it as a pressing issue.

My theory is that the reason that it does work so well is that
Classpath has a large social component and many issues are discussed
on irc before being realized as a patch.  The meeting at FOSDEM this
year reinforced this; to me it felt much more like ratification of a
direction we had already discussed than breaking completely new
ground.

Tom