Juergen Kreileder wrote:
Artur> btw. are you licensing (plans to license) java webstart?
Yes.
Could i help in work on this package?
Juergen
slu
Juergen Kreileder wrote:
>
> Artur> btw. are you licensing (plans to license) java webstart?
>
> Yes.
Could i help in work on this package?
>
>
> Juergen
>
slu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Juergen Kreileder wrote:
The basic answer[1] is yes, the packages can go into Debian non-free.
I just want to have an amendment to the license which explicitly says
that it's legal, it might take a few days more to get this done.
So how do we go on? Stephen, you're a Debian developer and a
Blackdo
Juergen Kreileder wrote:
>
> The basic answer[1] is yes, the packages can go into Debian non-free.
> I just want to have an amendment to the license which explicitly says
> that it's legal, it might take a few days more to get this done.
>
> So how do we go on? Stephen, you're a Debian develop
Something more positive :)
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/user/view/wlg/119
Something more positive :)
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/user/view/wlg/119
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Seth Arnold wrote:
Don't get too happy with non-free. It almost got cut a few months back,
and I don't expect it to live forever. I don't know how I feel about the
issue, but Debian *is* based on the idea of being completely Free.
Yeah, cut everything. It`s time to change distro.
Anyway, there is
Alexander Hvostov wrote:
Artur,
No package should depend directly on Sun's (or any other) Java
implementation. Rather, they should depend on java-virtual-machine or
java-compiler.
Regards,
Alex.
Yes. But i will rather see java2-vm and maybe java2-compiler etc. I
don`t want broke anything that is a
Seth Arnold wrote:
Netscape is there by virtue of being *the* web browser.
And sun/ibm/blackdown java should be there as *the* Java2 implementation!
I would imagine
its days are numbered. (As konqueror, mozilla, and more improve
drastically every day..)
I also would imagine that some day there wil
Seth Arnold wrote:
* Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010302 01:10]:
Artur, the problem is very simple. I hope I can explain it simply enoug
Debian is about Free Software. Free as in BSD, GPL, LGPL, Artistic,
XFree86, etc. All these licenses satisfy the requirements of the Debian
What abo
Seth Arnold wrote:
* Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010301 10:27]:
Yeah, but with this solution there is no way to include other free java2
apzz and libs in distribution.
Artur, the problem is very simple. I hope I can explain it simply enoug
Debian is about Free Software. Free as in BS
Seth Arnold wrote:
>
> Don't get too happy with non-free. It almost got cut a few months back,
> and I don't expect it to live forever. I don't know how I feel about the
> issue, but Debian *is* based on the idea of being completely Free.
Yeah, cut everything. It`s time to change distro.
>
>>
Alexander Hvostov wrote:
> Artur,
>
> No package should depend directly on Sun's (or any other) Java
> implementation. Rather, they should depend on java-virtual-machine or
> java-compiler.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alex.
Yes. But i will rather see java2-vm and maybe java2-compiler etc. I
don`t want
Seth Arnold wrote:
>
> Netscape is there by virtue of being *the* web browser.
And sun/ibm/blackdown java should be there as *the* Java2 implementation!
> I would imagine
> its days are numbered. (As konqueror, mozilla, and more improve
> drastically every day..)
I also would imagine that so
Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010302 01:10]:
>
>>> Artur, the problem is very simple. I hope I can explain it simply enoug
>>> Debian is about Free Software. Free as in BSD, GPL, LGPL, Artistic,
>>> XFree86, etc. All these l
Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010301 10:27]:
>
>> Yeah, but with this solution there is no way to include other free java2
>> apzz and libs in distribution.
>
>
> Artur, the problem is very simple. I hope I can explain it si
While IINAL I work for a company that has deployed Java applications running
under debian for several large Free Software Projects (pocketlinux, etc...) as
well as fortune 500 companies. Suns liscensing is basically ignorant and the
liability transfer clause probably isnt even legal. I for one w
Evan Prodromou wrote:
"AR" == Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Me> Just for my own curiosity, are there any Java 2 JVMs that -are-
Me> redistributable? Blackdown? IBM? Or is the jdk-XXX-installer
Me> method like the only way to make this work?
&
Evan Prodromou wrote:
"AR" == Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AR> But it will be good to have this in debian dist. This and
AR> others java lib, applications or systems.
It can't be in Debian, since it's not DFSG-Free.
If it can be legally redis
Evan Prodromou wrote:
"AR" == Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AR> What about JRE? What about other java providers? Ehh, this is
AR> without sense, there was a discussion about this long time
AR> ago.
Just for my own curiosity, are there
Colin Michael Yates wrote:
Hi,
Maybe I have missed the point (getting ready to be flamed :-)) but what is
the problem of downloading the Sun JDK and running it on Linux? It is very
easy to configure and use, and although slow, it is very reliable?
Yes, it`s true.
Even if you can't distribute Sun's
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Thursday 1 March 2001, at 16 h 40, the keyboard of Artur Radosz <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Anyway i hope that after quiting main Java2 blocker
I will learn Peter's lesson, I will not write this is absurd. But it is: the
fact that Java2 is non-free (a
> While IINAL I work for a company that has deployed Java applications running under
>debian for several large Free Software Projects (pocketlinux, etc...) as well as
>fortune 500 companies. Suns liscensing is basically ignorant and the liability
>transfer clause probably isnt even legal. I for
Evan Prodromou wrote:
>>>>>> "AR" == Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>
>
> Me> Just for my own curiosity, are there any Java 2 JVMs that -are-
> Me> redistributable? Blackdown? IBM? Or is the jdk-XX
Evan Prodromou wrote:
>>>>>> "AR" == Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>
>
> AR> But it will be good to have this in debian dist. This and
> AR> others java lib, applications or systems.
>
> It c
Peter Moulder wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:27:41PM +0100, Artur Radosz wrote:
One good news in this day (really bad day for me)!
Maybe now something with java-debain will change.
Go away.
What do you think you achieve by sending this message?
Stephan has already announced his intentions, so
Evan Prodromou wrote:
>>>>>> "AR" == Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>
>
> AR> What about JRE? What about other java providers? Ehh, this is
> AR> without sense, there was a discussion about this long time
&
Colin Michael Yates wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Maybe I have missed the point (getting ready to be flamed :-)) but what is
> the problem of downloading the Sun JDK and running it on Linux? It is very
> easy to configure and use, and although slow, it is very reliable?
Yes, it`s true.
>
> Even if you ca
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Thursday 1 March 2001, at 16 h 40, the keyboard of Artur Radosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Anyway i hope that after quiting main Java2 blocker
>
>
> I will learn Peter's lesson, I will not write this is absurd. But i
Peter Moulder wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:27:41PM +0100, Artur Radosz wrote:
>
>> One good news in this day (really bad day for me)!
>> Maybe now something with java-debain will change.
>> Go away.
>
>
> What do you think you achieve by sending this
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
[If you want me to read your messages, copy them to me: I've unsubscribed.]
I'm changing, I'm leaving for a new employer and, in my new office, I will no longer use Java (which is a good thing for me, see hereunder).
Ufff
One good news in this day (really bad day for m
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> [If you want me to read your messages, copy them to me: I've unsubscribed.]
>
> I'm changing, I'm leaving for a new employer and, in my new office, I will no longer
>use Java (which is a good thing for me, see hereunder).
> Ufff
One good news in this day (really
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> > Why don`t update java in debian? License? There are non-free section,
> > (sun java 1.1 also isn`t free, but it`s included in debian distro).
>
> There are several ways to be non-free. We do not package Microsoft Word, not
> even in non-free, because we don't hav
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
>
> > Why don`t update java in debian? License? There are non-free section,
> > (sun java 1.1 also isn`t free, but it`s included in debian distro).
>
> There are several ways to be non-free. We do not package Microsoft Word, not
> even in non-free, because we don't ha
Hello.
Are ther any plans to include latest java VM (1.2 or 1.3) in Debian?
All major distributions (excluding RedHat and my favorite, Debian)
announced support for it?
Why don`t update java in debian? License? There are non-free section,
(sun java 1.1 also isn`t free, but it`s included in debian
Hello.
Are ther any plans to include latest java VM (1.2 or 1.3) in Debian?
All major distributions (excluding RedHat and my favorite, Debian)
announced support for it?
Why don`t update java in debian? License? There are non-free section,
(sun java 1.1 also isn`t free, but it`s included in debian
36 matches
Mail list logo
