Java web pages

Thu Jan 18 17:44:00 GMT 2001

"Joseph S. Myers" wrote:
> On 2001年1月19日, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
>> > java-announce is like gcc-announce: it is supposed to be low traffic. I'd
> > like to see it stay.
>> However, the traffic levels on gcc-announce are hardly likely to overwhelm
> java-announce readers.

Okay, but my concern is do gcc-announce readers care about Java announcements?
Hypothetical examples: "gtk based AWT implementation now available!" or "RMI
now supported in current snapshot". Then again, such announcements are
probably infrequent enough that gcc readers won't mind seeing them, so I don't
care strongly about this.
> Should all Java patches be going to gcc-patches as well as java-patches
> (similar to the policy with libstdc++)?
>
The existing policy for this is that java compiler patches go to gcc-patches
(only) while runtime patches go to java-patches (only). Rationale: Runtime
patches are unlikely to be of interest to most gcc developers, while front-end
patches might be. Maybe it would be useful to have the compiler patches sent
to both lists however.
regards
 [ bryce ]