Hi Joerg ... first of all, this was an objective view of the Java-problem .. thnx :) On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 02:47:39PM +0200, Joerg Barfurth wrote: >>>In general adding ANY new features via Java is probably not a good thing: >Java may well be the appropriate implementation language for some >features. Whoever adds a new feature gets to choose an implementation >language. If you want the same feature but dislike the language used you >may try to port/reimplement in another language. Like C++ as the most of OpenOffice.org is implemented? Whats wrong with it? >I'm sure the accessibility people did not choose Java without good >reason. I think they should summarize their original discusssion and the >reasons why they use Java. (Maybe someone already did, I'm somewhat >behind with these lists) This is a very good idea? I will ask about it, but I do not know, who to ask, anyone? >But OTOH the core application must run without Java (afaik it does) and >it should build without Java (we are getting closer to that). Ok .. I'm not in doubt with it. But the big problem is, if we drop Java at once without any replacement, we will break some features .... maybe ... but I'm not sure, because, I do not really know, what in fact in OpenOffice.org based on Java and needs an installed jdk. >And each part that uses Java should try to keep requirements low and >document them to help ports decide wether they can or cannot support >that feature. Ok ... >>> Here's why I belive that: 1. We already get push back from >>> distributions who diasble these features since Java is not free >>> softrware (Debian). >>That is a big,biig problem. Sorry, my opinions are more politicle, but >>OpenOffice.org is _the_ office-suite lgpl'ed licensed at all. No others, >>like K-Office/Gnome-Office, have the feature like OpenOffice.org. >>So I think, it is important to get OpenOffice.org as free as possible of >>non- free software. OpenOffice.org is not free with the >>build-dependencies on Java and GPC. >There are two issues here. One is GPC. Afaict nobody is really happy >with the situation there, but there is no free replacement. (And if I >understood the discussions I have read on OOo lists, the Debian-OOo >replacement misses out on exactly those features which the graphics >developers need from GPC in the first place.) Thus if there is a free >(hopefully LGPL rather than only full GPL) replacement this might change. Ok .. sounds good ... great to hear. Some on the debian-openoffice mailinglist starts to work on it, but I do not know really the state. I will ask an report here. >But wrt Java the Situation is different. >Java and OpenSource are not opposites. There are many OSS projects >realized entirely in Java. And some people believe that is is beneficial >to be able to control OpenOffice.org from Java applications and to >extend it with Java components or applets. The big difference is, that Java is not a free software and makes development with java-code in free software projects much more difficult as it could be with a free Java. I hope, that Sun will decide as soon as possible, that Java becomes free! >We try to cater for people who don't or won't use Java - be it for >technical or for even political reasons. I think both. Java is not fully integrated in debian. There are some debian packages, but they are not part of debian, not in nonfree either, because, it was to nonfree, to get it into debian-nonfree section. But the nonfree-section is not Debian as well. These are political reasons. On the other side, some people do not use Java, because, they do not want to use it or their machine has not enough power to run Java happily. Since, some do not need Java for OpenOffice.org or see the dependency of OpenOffice.org to Java, they won't install it. >OTOH completely banning Java for political reasons does not seem right >either, particularly on a project heavily funded by Sun. :P Then .. Sun should let Java become as free software .. this will be the greatest ... >>>2. We have lots of users who think OOo is slow because it uses Java and >>>want to know why they need to add it. >>I have to be honest, I don't know, what in OpenOffice.org needs Java. >Afaik nothing does at runtime, except of course interfacing to Java code >in UNO and support for Java applets. Ok.... I went to the Sun Microsystem booth on Linuxday last weekend in Karlsruhe (Germany) and one there told me, that Java is only needed by the OpenOffice.org help system? But I am in doubt with that would be fully the case. >>>3. We have ports that do not have access to Sun Java virtual machines. >>>4. We have header problems from the gcc free java compiler/virtual >>>machine gcj >I think support for non-Sun Java tools would have to be contributed from >outside Sun. But I don't expect anybody would object, if it doesn't >break other stuff (including the support for Sun's Java). So far nobody >stepped up to the plate... I thought of it to step into! :) If someone will help ... :) Regards Jan -- .''`. Jan-Hendrik Palic | : :' : ** Debian GNU/ Linux ** | ** OpenOffice.org ** ,.. ,.. `. `' http://www.debian.org | http://www.openoffice.org ,: ..` ` `- jan.palic@linux-debian.de | ' ` `
Attachment:
pgpYqH7Sfj8lr.pgp
Description: PGP signature