Re: GCJ with OpenJDK Java API instead of GNU Classpath

Hi Andrew,

On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 18:20 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 17:31 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >> Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2009-05-07 at 16:28 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>> Neither; the JCK for OpenJDK6 which the builds of IcedTea in Fedora have passed:
> >>>> http://openjdk.java.net/groups/conformance/
> >>> I don't think that is a serious option, that is only available under NDA
> >>> and only granted to people who sign an SCA with Sun and even then access
> >>> is only granted if Sun feels like it.
> >> So why is it not a serious option?
> > 
> > Because it isn't a thing that a free software community can do
> > collaboratively in the open and involves requiring proprietary software.
> > Maybe a third party could do it for their own binary builds, but I don't
> > see how we as a community can recommend it, nor would I want to
> > recommend it myself.
> 
> That doesn't make it not a serious option.  It just means that
> you don't want to do it, and you don't think that the gcj
> community should do it.  It's still a serious option.

I think we agree. Let just s/serious//. It is an option. Just not one
that is IMHO feasible nor desirable for a free software project.

> > :) Since the JCK is under NDA that claim is not verifiable. But you
> > could say that the JCK assumes one particular interpretation yeah.
> > Still, if a secret test suite would say things should work one way, but
> > actual programs expect things differently I would go with not breaking
> > existing stuff.
> 
> This is FUD, plain and simple.  What evidence do you have of programs
> that require Java behaviour at odds with the JCK?

That is exactly my point. And you cannot prove the other way, that the
JCK tests behavior that is actually specified and not just a test for an
implementation detail. So we would be raising some smoke screen with no
way for the end user or our fellow hackers to do anything with except to
just trust those behind the NDA. They won't even be able to tell if it
is something that just happens on the particular setup that runs the TCK
or not.

Cheers,

Mark