Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Well, assume that FSF indeed did remove the exception. It would take
>> me 30 minutes or so to create a substitute BSD licensed dummy JNI
>> library with associated headers that would allow PL/Java to be built
>> without any external modules at all. It's then completely up to the
>> user what he/she wants to slot in as a replacement.
>
> Do we want to do that? I mean (and I am not saying it is, I am asking)
> is that a bit grey? I would prefer it be black and white.
>
The JNI API is an open standard so I have every right to create a BSD
licensed dummy for it. The user may choose a JVM from IBM, Sun, BEA, or
other (like GCJ) to run. That's the essence of having a standardized
API. What can possibly be 'grey' about that?
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
