Re: The Scope and Ownership of fedora-list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Rahul Sundaram wrote:

You have argued before that, that the problems are due to the lack of "official java" moniker and that has never really been the case. The problems are either non-standard features used by Java applications or things not covered by the specification.

But that doesn't matter.

Sure, it does. Your claim was incorrect as I told you earlier and this only proves it.

That's a matter of opinion. It may matter to you why your 3rd party application doesn't run. It matters to me whether it runs or not.

Things work or not.  And without a real Sun
Java which could have been trivial to obtain/install, many things don't work. And instead of providing the trivial help to install a working java, someone must have spent an enormous amount of effort providing something sort-of-like java,

OpenJDK is Fedora 9 is officially Java and certified as such. You cannot continue to claim otherwise. If you still run into problems, you should be filing bug reports.

Against what? Applications that specify that they require Sun Java 1.4 or 1.5? And what about that long history of shipping something known not to be Java?

--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux