javax.naming work (Classpath vs ClasspathX)

[Mark Wielaard]

Hi,

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 12:40:57PM +0100, Nic Ferrier wrote:
> >That is nice to hear. It would be good if we (The Java GNU community)
> >had some mailinglist to discuss this kind of issues. 
> 
> We do. It's an invitation only mailing list where the various leaders
> of the java projects can discuss stuff amongst themselves.
We do? Another list? Just to be sure which lists does GNU currently
have that are related to java projects? I know of the following:

The standard class libraries:
classpath@gnu.org
< http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath/ >
Which is quite active with a couple of emails each day.

The extended class libraries:
classpathx-discuss@gnu.org
< http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpatx-discuss/ >
Which had only a couple of emails the last few months.

I believe there are also two sublists for javamail and xml which
do not have any traffic. (But I am not subscribed to them at the moment.)

The (lib)gcj mailinglist
java@gcc.gnu.org
< http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/ >
Which has a couple of emails each day.
There is also the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailinglist which has more code
discussions.

The "official" questions about GNU and java list.
gnu-java@gnu.org
I don't know if or were the archives are.
I believe Aaron Renn runs this and forwards mails to the appropriate lists.

The GNU java webpages mailinglists
javaweb-discuss@gnu.org, javaweb-submit@gnu.org and javaweb-people@gnu.org
< http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/listinfo/
Which has a couple of emails each month but mainly spam.
I am not subscribed to them at the moment but sometimes read the archives
on the web.

Any others? Since a couple of these lists don't seem to have real
traffic we might want to merge them. It feels like a waste to have our
development and discussions so fragmented.

> If someone from the GCJ or Classpath projects asks me to put you on
> the list I will do so (it has to be that way to stop spammers).
Please put me on the list. Who are currently on it and were are the
archives? But isn't it possible to do the discussions on one of the
existing mailinglists?

> We (the ClasspathX people) want the FSF to rename the Guile licence to
> a more generic name so that we can use it widely without confusion,
> for example The Embedded Library GPL or The No Exception GPL.
Good. I liked the suggestion about the Minimal GPL (MGPL).

We really need a standard way of talking about the license we release
code under. Per Bothner says that the GCC community knowns this license
and understands what it means. But this is not true for people outside
this group.

Cheers,

Mark
-- 
Stuff to read:
    < http://www.toad.com/gnu/whatswrong.html >
  What's Wrong with Copy Protection, by John Gilmore