On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 10:25:52PM -0700, Cris J. Holdorph wrote: > Seth R Arnold Writes: > After re-reading his message, he did not state what the "fork" would be. > So, he would have to provide clarification himself.
Fair enough. :) > But I thought, his idea was, "because Java 2 is under SCSL ... lets try to > come up with a very 'Java 2-like' specification and then implement a JVM, > class libraries, etc. around it". how would you feel if instead of forking java like that, he meant forking the jdk? (For the sake of argument, if nothing else. :) thanks Cris. :) -- Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/ Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
