Re: status of java.util.regex support

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Wes" == Wes Biggs <address@hidden> writes:

Wes> My sense from the Classpath team was that they didn't want bridge code
Wes> that relied on code (gnu.regexp) that has not been copyright-assigned
Wes> to the FSF.  I'm willing to do this assignment, but I can't contribute
Wes> the gnu.regexp classes themselves without doing some due diligence and
Wes> contacting past contributors and getting them to waive their
Wes> individual copyrights.  I'll take a stab at doing this.

For things like crypto, javax.naming, and AWT, where there is a clean
separation of the Java interface and the underlying provider, I think
we can be fairly lenient about licensing and copyright ownership.  In
some of these situations it is clearly beneficial to have multiple
providers, in others it is clear that the licensing of the bridge code
should reflect the underlying library (e.g., the Gtk AWT peers should
be LGPL given that Gtk itself is).

For something like java.util.regex I think it would be preferable to
have a single implementation in Classpath itself.  So, yeah, in this
case I think assignment would be ideal.

Tom