GCJ with OpenJDK Java API instead of GNU Classpath

Thu May 7 17:34:00 GMT 2009

David Boreham wrote:
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>> 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.
>>> Not really. The problem is that the test can only be run by special people
> under special circumstances.

Yes.
> So only the binaries produced by those special people can be said to have
> passed the test. People in general can't run the test, reproduce its
> results,
> test bug fixes, and so on. >

Agreed.
> Therefore it's not a useful option for an open
> source project.

That doesn't follow.
The question is whether getting the JCK and using it is a serious
option. It certainly is a serious option for anyone who needs it:
they get the JCK, run it on their build, and by doing so check Java
compatibility.
It's a useful option for those who are prepared to get the JCK, and
when they put their changes back into the common sources, everyone
benefits.
No, it's not the paradigm of open development, and it's not an
ideal situation.
Andrew.