The Scope and Ownership of fedora-list

[Les Mikesell]

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 at gmail.com