Jason Hunter on Opening the Java Community Process

Dejected @Work writes: "At JavaOne it was hinted that Sun and the Apache Software Foundation have worked out how open source software could participate in the JCP (Java Community Process) but the precise resolution was not disclosed. This developerWorks interview with Jason Hunter (Apache rep. for the JCP) clear things up a little and specifically explains what this means for open source developers and the JCP."

Comments

Good stuff

[sab39]

I hate when interesting stories get posted on slashboxes, because that means there's pretty much guaranteed to be no discussion at all.

Oh well... I can still have a discussion all by myself in here :)

This is good news and a BIG step in the right direction. Where we go from here seems to depend on whether Sun work in good faith or not. If they do the bare minimum to meet their side of the agreement, or drag their feet, then nothing will really change.

If on the other hand they take the agreement as a starting point and push forward with it agressively, this could be the start of a quiet revolution in the Java world. Getting more and more JSRs with Open Source reference implementations will start a process where Sun recognizes the positive PR and positive impact on the development process (the success of Tomcat itself has probably opened a few eyes inside Sun to the possibility of this) and might lead, eventually, to the opening of the entire JDK.

Making the JDK itself open source would pave the way for its inclusion in all major Linux distributions (including debian!) and for vast amounts of open source bug-fixing talent to be set to work. Unlike the initial release of OpenOffice or Mozilla, the JDK isn't in "that bad" of a state today, codewise, as far as I can tell, so the ramp-up period to widespread community involvement could be much quicker (although there are always the social barriers to break down).

And suddenly things like using Tomcat over say PHP or mod_perl wouldn't make you a second-class citizen in the open source world :)

Re:Good stuff

[56ker]

Oh well... I can still have a discussion all by myself in here :)

- you're not the only one in here you know! :o)

Re:Good stuff

[sab39]

you're not the only one in here you know! :o)

Ok... but do you or anyone else in here have any opinions related to the topic of the story? :)

(Or, for that matter, the substance of my post?)

If not, then I'm still having a discussion all by myself - at least, inasmuch as it relates to the topic of the story, which is what I would have liked to discuss.

Still, meaningless meta-discussion is better than no discussion at all, I guess ;)

Stuart.

Hunter is too optimistic

[software_non_olet]

... but certainly that's part of his role.

I'm not a lawyer and I don't want to become one, just to code something for the Open Source community. Hence I have to decide from the belly.

And according to my feelings the Java development is no-longer-so-open software. It became lawyer's country - and the whole situation is no longer white (open software) or black (proprietary), it's gone grey. The current discussions ar ample proof for that. Endless meetings and papers how to decide upon new papers, lawers all over the place.

But for such ground work as a development environment there need to be clear rules; the basement must be solid before you can build a house on it. And the concrete of this basement is not yet dry.

If the legal situation is not changing in the next future, 2002 will be the start of the decline of Java.

Long ago when Ada was starting to become available (and after APL had had it's crash landing) there was this saying among compiler writers: "Any programming language with an 'A' in it's name will not survive". And look at what happened with Ada - it's confined to western military developments. The leading role of the DOD became a hindrance to use Ada in non-western and non-military realms. After it's initial excellant support of Ada, the DOD should have given it's child the freedom to develop in the commercial and non-western world (which the DOD failed to do).

Now Sun is trying to make the same errors with Java which the DOD was doing with Ada - not giving enough freedom for a grown up child.

And the Apache group should stick more to it's original way of development - after all why did they succeed in the market place? If the Apache development would have been run under Sun's lead would we use the webserver all over the planet?

Re:Hunter is too optimistic

[Stu Charlton]

It has never been grey. It's rather black and white: http://www.jcp.org/

It's just a different way of doing business. The OSS community provides one extreme, Microsoft provides the other extreme. Sun's has something that balances compatability, remuneration, and the free sharing/modification of information.

It's certainly flawed, looking at all the spats with Apache. But there's genuine interest in making it work.

I really don't get what you mean by "lawyers all over the place". The situaiton here is nothing like what happened to ADA -- Java is already heavily entrenched in the enterprise.

Your concern that Java will begin to decline in 2002 leads me to ask a pragmatic question: replaced by what? .NET? Perl, Python, Ruby?

Re:Hunter is too optimistic

[msouth]

"Any programming language with an 'A' in it's name will not survive".

All I can say is, thank goodness Larry left it out of Perl.

Re:BIG steps by BIG organizations?

[sab39]

Perhaps my estimation of what's BIG has been tainted by the long line of disappointingly tiny steps that Sun has taken in the past :)

It's fair to say that Java is my home ground; I've used it in my day job for the past 2 years and also made some minor contributions to various attempts at replicating it in true Open Source. Most of what I've been involved in has been server-side; widespread desktop usage would be great, IMHO, but that still seems a long way off from where I stand. For technical reasons (crappy toolkit) as well as political ones.

I agree that true Open Source should be considered the ultimate goal. I sympathize with those that won't consider using Java unless it is Open Source - sometimes I feel bad myself for using it in its current state of non-openness (and no, it's not "no longer" - Java is more open now than it ever was (except perhaps for the trademark, which is irrelevant really), but still far from being open enough).

So having said all that, let me qualify my use of "BIG" in capital letters. I think this is a BIG step towards the ultimate goal of true Open Source for Java. As I said in my original post, what Sun does now will determine whether they continue after this one big step to make the other 4 or 5 similar-sized steps to actually releasing the JDK as Open Source.

I understand, but disagree with, your point about "just two players" not being enough. The unfortunate situation with Java today is that by definition, one player is enough - if that player is Sun. Nobody else can make any difference at all. So the significance of this step is that Sun is one of the parties to it - which implies that it really will make a difference. Until the magical point of true Open Source is reached, the only steps that matter to Java are those made by Sun. After that, the benefits of Open Source start applying and everybody gets a say.

Stuart.

doesn't solve the problem

[j09824]

Sun is still calling all the shots when it comes to Java. Sun should follow through on their original promise: to make the core of the Java platform an ISO or ECMA standard that anybody can implement and build on without any obligation to Sun whatsoever.

Sun's excuses for not following through on their commitments don't hold water. Sun claims that their tight control over Java is necessary to ensure compatibility, but the Java APIs already fail to guarantee cross platform compatibility, and some of Sun's APIs are so deficient that third party APIs have already become a de-facto standard--on some platforms.

In different words, as far as I'm concerned, the JCP changes don't address the fundamental problems with Java and where it is going.