On Wed, 29 Apr 2009, Sean Gilligan wrote: > Russ Herrold added the "special note" on OpenJDK, hopefully he will > chime in. Sean, I think you are on the right track; I would refactor the java articles into a couple of them in a sub-tree, with a chooser at the head, probably forming on pre/post 5.3, and on Method A and Method B, to better handle sub issues, and aid maintenance. The 'political' background on Java and the absence of a Four Freedoms freely availabile test suite to produce a conforming Java (it is seriously not free, and remains so) constrains the CentOS project mightily. We need nothing but elideable trademarks (and no other IP constraints) to be able to safely build it. No NDA's no indemnifications, no patent threats, no non-freely reproduceable copyrights. See my IA_AL disclaimer in the piece cited in a moment, included by reference here. In the absence of a reasonable test suite for EACH OF 1) a given Java implementation, and disjunctly 2) a given Java application, I have led (strenuously) opposition to the inclusion of Java in the LSB standard, and will continue to so drive my views, until and unless Sun's entire toolchain [of that from another project] becomes Four Freedoms (or at least OSI FOSS) compatible. https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lsb-discuss/2008-August/005410.html has all the gory details. This opposition does not mean I oppose Java and its use; it is just not FOSS. I am please to see that the java application I use (also using the AWT) 'just works' under 5.3 with the addition of some fonts; when I have time I'll narrow down just what I need in a minimal install. -- Russ herrold