Mon, 6 Jan 2003 14:05:25 +0100
On 01/05/03 Steve Newman wrote:
> Yes, I have no objection to relicensing, multiple licenses, or whatever.
> Basically I have no agenda here, I'm just happy to see the code get used.
Thanks, Steve! I think you should get cvs access (see instructions at
http://www.go-mono.com/ccvs.html) so that you can apply the new license
and commit directly to the code to the stuff in cvs.
> A related note: I believe Gopal V (firstname.lastname@example.org) has just checked
> the JANET code into Portable.Net. Since some of the next steps are pretty
> obvious (finish ECMAScript 3, add JScript.net support, etc.), it would
> be a shame to see the code forked. I've never participated actively in
Yes, forking the code at this point would be very bad.
> an open-source project before, let alone dealt with code that was shared
> by two projects, so I don't know how to address this. As the original
> author, I could try to act as a coordinator or moderator for the core
> code in any case, as each project might have a different agenda for how
> Restated: I do not feel competent to propose a specific mechanism for
> if someone else can propose a mechanism, I am happy to help implement it.
If the new effort in the code is to add Reflection.Emit support and
integrate it into the class libraries, I think it makes sense to just
keep the master copy of the code on the mono cvs server since we
implemented Reflection.Emit. The people that are willing to work on the
code already have accounts on the mono cvs server, so this would make it
easier to contribute. The portable.net people will be able to get the
code anyway once they have Reflection.Emit implemented.
email@example.com Monkeys do it better