Re: [DotGNU]Re: Support Java for .GNU

[Norbert Bollow]

I wrote in response to a message from Theo:

> > Aren't you aware of the Free Software implementations of Java?
> > (They're not as powerful as Sun's proprietary implementation,
> > but quite usable.)

Martin Coxall <address@hidden> replied:

> I am,

I was not speaking to you :)

> but simply because you release the code under the GPL does not absolve 
> you from compliance with Sun's stringent (and proprietary) licensing terms, 

Please explain.  Let's say I buy a book on progamming in Java
(written by anyone), and then I implement a compiler, runtime
system and libs that make everything work which is wriiten in
the book.  Let's say I call the result of my work Gnava and
release it under the terms of GNU GPL.  Will I be required in
any way to "comply with Sun's lincensing terms"?  I don't think
so.

> and the use of a closed, proprietary language.

Sun cannot stop me from extending Gnava in any way I see fit.

> I feel we have no choice to avoid Java entirely, or suffer the
> pollutement of our system architecture with legal hassle from
> overactive Sun lawyers who see us threatining their revenue
> stream.

As a matter of fact Microsoft is a much greater threat to Sun
than DotGNU is.  It may even be in Sun's business interests
to support DotGNU, for example with a significant code drop.

> > > help out Mono instead...
> >
> > Actually there's a problem in this area.  Mono's C# compiler is
> > written in C#.  So you need another C# compiler to bootstrap it.
> > How to do this without using Microsoft's C# compiler?
> 
> Well, there is Portable.NET's attempts to write a GCC
> frontend, of course.

That is not quite accurate.  In fact, according to
Portable.NET's FAQ, writing a GCC frontend is not the best
approach to writing a C# compiler in C.

> C# is an ideal language in which to write c# compilers,
> however, because of the nature of the System.reflection.emit()
> API.

This is a matter of convenience, and IMHO it is certainly not
worth the rissk of relying on a C# compiler from Microsoft for
bootstrapping the compilation.  You are of course free to
disagree with me in this regard.

> What we need is a GNU/Linux JITter for Mono (written in
> C). Ximian has work on that well underway. If we helped them,
> we could have it down in a month or two...

Since you are a Mono developer I find it unacceptable and
dishonest that you try to motivate DotGNU developers for helping
out the Mono project by saying things like "if we helped them".

There is nothing wrong with a request for help from Mono if it
reads like "The Mono project would really appreciate if you
DotGNU folks could help us out."

But as you are saying it, it is manipluation and definately not
acceptable.

As listadmin of the dotgnu.org mailing lists and member of the
DotGNU core team I tell you to refrain from using the word "we"
for referring to DotGNU developers from now on.

The DotGNU project uses a very open process process and in
general I am very happy whenever I see people slowly identifying
themselves with the DotGNU project and starting to refer to all
DotGNU developers as "we".

However, you have (perhaps consciously, perhaps unconsciously)
started to abuse the openness of the DotGNU development process
for purposes of manipulation.

This must stop.

I hope you understand this.

Greetings, Norbert.

-- 
Norbert Bollow, Weidlistr.18, CH-8624 Gruet  (near Zurich, Switzerland)
Your own domain with all your Mailman lists: $15/month http://cisto.com
Business Coaching for Internet Entrepreneurs ---> http://thinkcoach.com
Tel +41 1 972 20 59      Fax +41 1 972 20 69      address@hidden