OpenJDK Regression Test Harness (jtreg) - open source

[Jonathan Gibbons]

Andrew,

Thanks for the feedback.  I will try and clarify the text.

The intent is to say that I do not know of an suitable unencumbered  
implementation of the javax.comm classes.  Sun provides an  
implementation, but it is old and barely supported.

There is an open source implementation of those classes in a different  
package -- in gnu.io.  So for each class in javax.comm that JTHarness  
would otherwise use, there is an equivalent class in gnu.io,

Thus you can "tweak" the JT Harness source code by modifying the  
classes that would otherwise use javax.comm.*.

If you do edit the code, you do not need to use Sun's encumbered  
implementation of javax.comm.

The ironic bottom line is that this part of JT Harness is not ever  
used by jtreg, but we decided it was simpler to suggest that people  
just modify the imports, rather than surgically remove those bits of  
JT Harness.

-- Jon

On May 4, 2008, at 5:16 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:

> On 02/05/2008, Jonathan Gibbons <Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com> wrote:
>> I'm pleased to announce that the OpenJDK Regression Test Harness,  
>> also known
>> as jtreg, is now available with an open source license, instead of  
>> the
>> earlier binary code license. jtreg now uses the open source version  
>> of Sun's
>> JavaTest harness, called JT Harness [1]. Apart from the change to  
>> use JT
>> Harness, and a few minor bug fixes, and a change in the version  
>> number, it
>> is otherwise the same jtreg as before.
>>
>> For now, the source is available in a source bundle, available from  
>> the
>> OpenJDK jtreg pages [2].
>>
>> Many thanks to all those on the OpenJDK, JT Harness and legal teams  
>> who
>> worked to make this possible.
>>
>> -- Jon
>>
>> [1] http://jtharness.dev.java.net/
>> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/jtreg/
>>
>>
>
> Just a quick comment on these pages:
>
> On http://openjdk.java.net/jtreg/build.html it says the Java
> Communications API 'is not available under Open Source'.  This
> statement seems meaningless to me.  It should either be 'the source
> code is not available', 'is not available under an OSI-approved
> license' or 'is not available under a Free Software license',
> depending on what the intended meaning is.  Being not available 'under
> Open Source' implies there is some Open Source entity of which the API
> is not a part, which seems like nonsense to me.
>
> Other than that, thanks for releasing the source code to jtreg at  
> last! :)
> -- 
> Andrew :-)
>
> Support Free Java!
> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
> http://openjdk.java.net
>
> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8