Re: java.awt status LGPL -> GPL?

[Chris Gray]

> (Although working on a GPLed implementation
> now that we have a AWT implementation under a Apache style license
> available, which Acunia seems to want to actually make GPL compatible,
> does not make much sense to me anymore.)

Let me modulate this a bit (particularly as I won't be around much in the
next
four days, and I'm nervous about where this discussion may go without any
real-world input).

Firstly, although the blurb says "Full 1.1.8 AWT", this is also release
0.7.2,
not 1.0.  So whilst all of 1.1.8 is all on our roadmap somewhere in the near

future, we're not there yet.  See
<URL:http://wonka.acunia.com/package-report/awt-package-report.html>
for the state of the art here and now.

Secondly, although I responded positively to Mark's suggestions regarding
GPL-compatibility, it is still possible that our management would decide
that
protecting our trademark is more important, and that it is essential to have
the
trademark clause -in- the licence, not next to it.  IANAL, TINLA, etc..

Of course we would love to have Mark working on our AWT 8->, the more
so as the main thing standing between us and the advertised full 1.1.8 is
the number of hours in the day.  And I'm sure that our Rudolph is already
much nearer to that target than any other code base you could use.  Just
don't everybody run away with the idea that the problem is already solved.

Best wishes

Chris Gray
VM Architect, ACUNIA