[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Mark Wielaard
Subject: Harmony?
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 11:40:16 +0200


I believe this is the first mention of this suggested harmony project on
our mailinglist.

On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 08:49 +0200, Thomas Van Machelen wrote:
> Miguel de Icaza's view on Harmony

A bit uninformed. But probably a reaction on the very poor announcement
and FAQ text published together with the Harmony project announcement.
Which obviously I didn't proofread.

My apologies for the poor introduction of this harmony effort. Tom,
Dalibor, Jeroen and I were asked to help out to make sure this new
(hypothetical, this is just a discussion period) project at the ASF be a
nice addition and extension to the GNU Classpath "ecosystem". But we
weren't asked to give feedback on the initial announcement. So it all
took us a bit by surprize when it was suddenly publicly announced.

Dalibor wrote a pretty good overview of the current situation:

Reactions from various people are also aggregated on

And just to correct a little information in Jeroen's latest blog. The
FSF/ASF talks are about the general (L)GPL/ASL 2.0 incompatabilities. We
do hope to finally solve those since most of them are just legal
technicalities and misunderstandings/misinterpretations. (This is
something I think is of even more value then this new harmony project).

The current exception statement to the GPL used by GNU Classpath is
compatible with and acceptable to the Apache community. But the FSF did
say that IF the exception statement was in any way unclear THEN they
would certainly be willing to clarify it so that there was no obstacle
for adoption of GNU Classpath. There currently doesn't seem any need to
do this though.

Unfortunately I didn't have any time this weekend to properly react to
it since I was mainly off-line. So all I did was do some quick replies
to specific questions on the harmony mailinglist, archived here:

I'll do a proper announcement of the Harmony project and how we can help
out with it from my view later today.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]