Sun Unilaterally Revokes the FreeBSD Java License
ravenII writes "The FreeBSD foundation has announced the news of Sun terminating the SCSL OEM-like license given to FreeBSD foundation. The foundation's attempts to contact Sun to renegotiate the license have gone unanswered. Javalobby.org also carries the news." It would seem that Sun has terminated all SCSL licenses across the board in preparation for the release of Java 5, and while the renegotiation process may be a bit bumpy, it's likely that Java will continue to be ported to FreeBSD.
OK. I'm going to ask the obvious. Why not go with another JVM, such as say the Blackdown version?
:)
Oh, and FP.
I never understood how it's good for Sun to prohibit the redistrobution of Java with BSD or Linux.
It seems to me that any benefits there might be would be lost because they are opening themselves up to having an open source, or at least more easily re-distributable JVM become the most common, and therefore standard, VM.
Besides, if they are giving it away for free anway, what benefit is there to forcing anyone who wants it to get it from Sun?
Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
There are now much better alternatives to Java for many programming tasks.
I've switched over to Ruby and my productivity has skyrocketed. Anyone who's done object-relational mapping using Java for example, should take a look at how Ruby does it using ActiveRecord.
I still use C++ for some programming tasks but find the need to do so less frequent each year. Thank God for smartpointers (boost library).
I might take a look at OCaml in the near future. Heard great things about it.
There was me trying to figure out: How do you revoke a BSD license? Surely someone can just take the code already?
BSD the OS, not BSD the license; it's a fairly oddly worded title...
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Oh for a -1 Inarticulate Rambling modifier...
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
If anyone needed an answer
I'm not directly involved here, so I don't know all the details, but I talk to people from the FreeBSD Foundation on a regular basis. Hopefully they'll forgive me if I get some of the details wrong here.
Basically, the story can be summarized as follows:
1. Sun dropped the ball by mistake.
2. FreeBSD Foundation didn't know what was going on, and mentioned the problem in their newsletter.
3. People at Sun realized that they had dropped the ball.
4. Sun picked up the ball and put it through the goal posts (or whatever the right sports analogy is).
This whole story is really just a misunderstanding. Sun wasn't trying to be evil, they just made a mistake, and as soon as they realized that there was a problem they started doing all that they could to fix it.
The new license should be announced Real Soon Now.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
Justin Gibbs, The foundations founder and financial officer said yesterday that this was just a case of bad communication and that it was already resolved. Poul-Henning
Poul-Henning Kamp -- FreeBSD since before it was called that...
Disclaimer 1: I have READ the Fine Article.
What it is: Sun licenses the JVM to the FreeBSD community under the SCSL. Sun unilaterally has the right to revoke it. Sun DID revoke it, albeit in preparation to negotiate terms for new community license. Guys at FreeBSD do not know who to ask right now. E-mails from non-revenue-generating FreeBSD got unanswered.
What it really is: RMS is right. Anyone deploying Java apps under FreeBSD for a reason or another is now a hostage in this situation. Why? Because Sun *can* (and, depending on shareholders $$$ desire, *will*) pull the plug at any time. Why? Because the JVM and standard classes are NOT FREE SOFTWARE. Free Software is about freedom, not about price.
Oh, come on, everyone with prospects of starting their first Java projects, especially governments going the Free Software way, should DROP it and go to other platform.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Please, mods, mod parent up. This is phk -- read yo' code. He knows what he's talking about, not to mention that everybody else agrees.
Sun's Java, a programming language aimed for all platforms and operating systems, supposedly ubiquitous in any computing environment. So, let me ask, why would they, with that goal in mind, revoke *any* license for *any* operating system? They simply limit their potential users and the potential of their language as being widely adopted.
shop.envescent.com - Computer hardware and more.
The FreeBSD issue was a licensing mistake... that with Sun's current licensing scheme, you are at the mercy of their mistakes, because the license is revokable (in other words, because Java is not Free Software).
:-) because OSX is Not Free Software either.
IRT Apple, Sun did not Give support, they Sold support
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
A) I was reading at -1. The "this was a mistake and we cleared it up" post had not showed up when I started posting.
B) It is not relevant that the revoking was by mistake. Eventually, it can be done on purpose, too. And that is the problem.
C) No, they did not knew exactly who to ask, and at least when the FreeBSD foundation report was done they did not receive any answer. It's irrelevant for the discussion of this piece, IMHO, that they eventually cleared up the situation. Had the climate at Sun WRT FreeBSD been different, Sun could stall this and caused a lot of damage. And they still can, at any time, because Java is not Free Software.
D) I am not raving and nor is RMS, which is whom I was referring to. Java is not Free Software. If you are considering Free Software (as a lot of governments are doing nowadays with a lot of good reasons to do so... see http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html) you should not consider Java as a good option for software development (unless Kaffe [or other Free JVM] + GNUClassPath is good enough for you). And this was my conclusion in the end of my post.
E) As an aftertought, disclaimer, etc: I started to post my piece as soon as I saw the blurb (when I woke up this morning) and it had only 9 posts at -1. When I finally organized those three short paragraphs, and clicked Submit, it had 20+ posts, with some (3?) of those under the "A case of bad communication by phkamp (524380) (#11273654)" post. I took good 10-15 minutes to write this answer up, because I don't troll. I believe that RMS is right and that proprietary software is a legalized scam. And I really like J2EE (technically) as a platform but I really dislike the power that Sun exerts over it and the MS-like lock-in that it represents.
--
And this is not a sig.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Well i guess its time to find out how well the svr4/sunos emulation in freebsd holds up and run the native version
Music is everybody's possession.
It's only publishers who think that people own it.
Fuck Beta
~John Lenno
What? a BSD news item with only 1 out of 31 messages modded down? What is the world coming to?
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
I would just like to say that I hope Java dies. I do not like it, I do not use it, I do not approve of it, I do not like other people using it, it should just shrivel up and die. I will start a company called The Universe so I can engulf Sun and make Java a bad memory.
I read
Java licences are dying ...
While its their product and their choice, the attitude they are expressing makes me want to NOT continue with Java ( or sun ) in any form.
Revoking existing licenses is just uncool. It also is bad business.
Some people need older versions of software.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
This seems like an odd thing to do - increase restrictions on Java's use. Especially with increasing competion from C#... Maybe not though considering their bedfellows wonder if there was a push from redmond here - and what might the alteriour motive be. Sun just seem to make mistake after mistake. They will be assimilated or simply die.
"There are now much better alternatives to Java for many programming tasks."
Like Scheme.
Its can make Sun's OS's more attaractive to people that have bought in, and sold their soul on Java applications..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Have *you* read the SCSL? can *you* quote what you're talking about?
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Oh, maybe you meant 'Sun'. My bad.
As I said in another post (#11167772), I believe every producer of what lawyers call "Intellectual Property" should be remunerated mainly by producing it and less by generating a lot of copies of it.
... well ... being themselves, and Sony/EMI/*AA-affiliate gets the REAL $$$^$$$ for copying and distributing it. Do you get the difference?
This is, mainly, what happens today to the real *producer*: programmers get salaries, journalists (who are the *real* writers in terms of quantity) get salaries... while Britney/Eminem gets a lot of $$$ for
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I have run Linux JDKs on FreeBSD/i386 using the Linux ABI. Not in a production environment, but it's what I would consider if the native port ever went away.
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
A. the SCSL can be revoked at any time by Sun (sections 6, 7, and 8).
B. this applies IIRC to other JVMs for Linux and Windows too.
C. those facts (A and B above) permit that Sun exerts enourmous pressure on the Java Free Software Comunity, because...
D. (surprise, surprise)Java is not Free Software.
E. (conclusion) Thou Shall Not use Java to build Free Software.
Got it?
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Please remember that practically every CPU architecture besides x86 is big-endian; Mac's, 99% of UNIX (AIX/HPUX/Solaris) machines, Z/OS machines, etc.
ARM7 and ARM9 can be set to big-endian or little-endian, but they're frozen to little-endian in every Nintendo Game Boy Advance and Nintendo DS handheld video game system. The MIPS processor in Sony's PS1 and PS2 video game consoles is configured little-endian as well.
The .NET framework has a free implementation. The Java platform has a free implementation in the combination of GCJ, Kaffe, and GNU Classpath. Which is more complete in practice?
..and you know it.
Note to moderators: you have just wasted one point.
Simple end user here.
License pull. Like it's gonna make any kind of difference!!!
I've been trying to have java in mozilla for browsing for weeks, but freeBSD 5.2 and linuxbase 7 won't cooperate and sun's instructions are a mess.
Who needs to use a license to pull in order to sterilize innovation when you can poison the "make install clean" process instead?
Anyone who knows better than me should visit the FreeBSD wiki and leave documentation proving mozilla CAN run java at all.
Or linux-mozilla. Or thunderbird. Whatever. I'm getting less picky every week about which browser to run java on. I may even downgrade my FreeBSD to run java if I can't find a solution in the next two weeks. *shudder*
I'm putting Sun on my no-buy list, next to Microsoft and Ron Hubbard's fiction books!
P.S.: The FreeBSD wiki won't pull license on the documentation or be hard to use. This proves Sun is not involved. (-;
Microsoft is pure dog-ma. FreeBSD is pure cat-ma.
What is it with you guys and SUN anyway. I knew years ago that SUN was a dangerous partner. I spec'ed computers for a construction company, and as a result was on many mailing lists for wholesale products and component hardware. Including SUN. Many times SUN would call me, among others, for 'surveys'. The gist of thsee were that SUN was feeling the market for a business model that slashdotters would feel alien. SUN is a bit worse than micro$$$$$$, only a whole lot smaller. Their version of computer industry heaven, circa 1993, was to have corporate based servers provide rented applications and storage space to consumers running thin client RISC machines with rudimentary hard drives. All control would be in the hands of SUN. The users would'nt even be allowed to own the machines in any real sense. Certainly they would never be allowed supervisor privileges on even their own machines. The internet would be charged by the byte transferred to what distance and across how many boundaries. It was worse than the old AOL!
Thankfully, people kept their PCs......and SUN did not have the money to literally burn to drive up its market share through relentless marketing, AOL style.
Sun continues to behave like a spoiled brat that does not want anyone else playing with their toys. Microsoft managed to dominate the world of Java with their jvm and development tools. When Sun realized that they were losing control of their technology, they teamed up with companies like oracle, novell, and apple to sue Microsoft. They probably would not be in business anymore if they were not awarded billions of dollars in damages.
I hope they continue to be sociopathic a$$holes. Maybe one day everyone will bury Java and leave Sun to play with themselves.
The CLR is better than the JVM anyways.
Sorry this is off topic. Unless you actually NEED Java, the horro,) I would suggest you don't install it. Sadly it is needed to access some poorly designed webpages and build openoffice.
/usr/ports/distfiles. Sun changes webaddress and package names often.c e/j2se/j ava2/download.html
. com/freebsddom/java/jdk14.ht ml
/compat/linux/proc
/usr/ports/java/jdk14
/usr/local/linux-sun-jdk1.4.2/jre/plugin/i386/ns61 0/libjavaplugin_oji.so /usr/X11R6/lib/firefox/lib/firefox-x.x.x/plugins/
Java
Place these 4 files in
http://www.sun.com/software/communitysour
1)patchset - bsd-jdk14-patches-7.tar.gz
http://www.eyesbeyond
2)bin - j2sdk-1_4_2-bin-scsl.zip *www.sun.com
3)source - j2sdk-1_4_2-src-scsl.zip *www.sun.com
4)j2sdk-1_4_2_06-linux-i586.bin *www.sun.com
Then as Root:
kldload linprocfs
mount -t linprocfs linprocfs
cd
make clean install
Reboot the system?
Firefox (Mozilla?)
I use Firefox but the Mozilla should be about the same except use the mozilla directory instead. I think you just need to create a link to the Java plugin directory (I haven't done this since 5.3 was released and I only had to do it twice):
ln -s
Test
In firefox (mozilla?)you enter the address: about:plugins
Java should be listed, if not it didn't work. Sorry if this doesn't work for you but I haven't done it for a while.
Same old FUD, that has been disproved countless times...
.
... facts are facts. ;)
FreeBSD:
FreeBSD, Stealth-Growth Open Source Project (Jun 2004)
"FreeBSD has dramatically increased its market penetration over the last year."
Nearly 2.5 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD (Jun 2004)
"[FreeBSD] has secured a strong foothold with the hosting community and continues to grow, gaining over a million hostnames and half a million active sites since July 2003."
What's New in the FreeBSD Network Stack (Sep 2004)
"FreeBSD can now route 1Mpps on a 2.8GHz Xeon whilst Linux can't do much more than 100kpps."
NetBSD:
NetBSD sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (May 2004)
NetBSD again sets Internet2 Land Speed World Record (30 Sep 2004)
OpenBSD:
OpenBSD Widens Its Scope (Nov 2004)
Review: OpenBSD 3.6 shows steady improvement (Nov 2004)
*BSD in general:
..and last but not least, we have the cutest mascot as well - undisputedly. ;)
Deep study: The world's safest computing environment (Nov 2004)
"The world's safest and most secure 24/7 online computing environment - operating system plus applications - is proving to be the Open Source platform of BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) and the Mac OS X based on Darwin."
--
Being able to read *other people's* source code is a nice thing, not a 'fundamental freedom'.
Let's not conveniently forget this test was completely UniProcessor, which is precicely where FreeBSD added additional overhead by its efforts to move away from the GIANT Kernel Lock (which NetBSD-2.0 still uses enitrely).
I would definately like to see these same tests performed on SMP-hardware and see if the NetBSD results are Still this much better than FreeBSD's.
As far as I see it, it must be the rewording Sun is doing in SCSL, in order to use it also in OpenSolaris.
This is what makes projects like Kaffe all the more important.
Constitutionally Correct
http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/gmcgarry/
Keep in mind that Sun != Java much like Red Hat != Linux.
NO.
Sun CAN revoke any license for any "official"-JDK.
Red Hat can NOT revoke any license for any GPL'd software.
If you are not using kaffe/gij/gcj/... + Classpath, your JDK license can be revoked at ANY TIME and that is what I am trying to explain for six or seven posts.
Oh, yeah, they cannot control how you distribute your own software but they CAN control how you distribute THEIRS (their class libs, for instance) and they CAN control your USE of theirs (their compiler, their interpreter, etc).
And... as I said since the beginning, I would not recommend using Java for development. There are other options. Explore them. I even said in this same thread more than once: I think technically J2EE is a wonderful platform. Even so, I don't recommend using it to develop Free Sofware.
--
And this is not a sig.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
HE FreeBSD Foundation and Sun say they are patching up a row they had over the distribution of binaries for the Java runtime and the JDK. Story on yahoo
There are options. Explore them.
.NET and the various languages they offer (VB, C++, C#) or avoid Microsoft and choose Java.
The scenario: an application that must be readily distributable and runnable on Solaris, GNU/Linux, Windows, OS X, and (hopefully) *BSD. The definition of "readily" is:
- build once (meaning compile once)
- no installation of third-party software. In other words, the application's distribution package must have everything it needs to run
- it must install correctly on all of the listed operating systems simply by running a wizard and taking the default options
Business issues to consider: conservative estimates specify approx. 8 "man" years to develop. All versions of application must communicate easily with other versions of the same application regardless of platform, and must also communicate easily with third-party applications and services, a la web services (SOAP, XML, etc)
Timeframe: no more than 24 calendar months elapsed time to 1.0, including all QA and testing.
Now, let's consider the options.
C: requires multiple builds, difficult to find suitably accomplished developers to meet timeframe requirements, major issues with memory management and other difficulties.
C++: all of the above from C, developer pool is smaller for UNIX-ish platforms, larger for Windows
VB: Windows only, developer pool is large
Perl: requires third-party installation on Windows (ActivePerl), developer pool is sizable. Difficult to code enterprise-wide application (we tried it). Server-based installations require something like mod_perl and Apache.
Python: developer pool very small
Ruby: developer pool very small
Java: no third-party installations, easily distributable, one build, enterprise apps easily created, developer pool is large
Seriously, for many, many purposes in the business world (where people make money to spend elsewhere) Java is the only answer. I'm not saying that because of bias, I'm saying that because I spend several months of every year writing specifications and design documents for such business applications.
I've been hacking around with Python for a couple of weeks lately. Very cool stuff, but I wouldn't even attempt trying to justify choosing it to any of my clients or my bosses for any number of reasons.
If you want to just start writing some application so that you can release it under the GPL and get it onto SourceForge and Freshmeat and look cool, then yeah, there are many different options for language and environment.
However, in a practical, real-world situation with deadlines, management buy-in, long term maintenance and support, etc. the options these days are basically two: bite the bullet and go Microsoft only with
I welcome a reasonable case proving I'm wrong. Claiming I'm wrong just because you happen to be good friends with half a dozen people who are Perl/Python/Ruby or C/C++ gods doesn't prove your case, though, because I'm talking about being able to find the people needed through a normal hiring process. That means geographic location, skills, quantity, etc.
Disclaimer: my team is currently developing an application that could not have been developed with anything but Java unless we were willing to support Microsoft platforms only, and that wasn't an option.
Python is what I would recommend if you asked (and paid) me.
Let's see your requirements:
-build once: ok?;
-install: you can make an executable with everything needed, will install nicely;
small developer pool? I don't think so. lots of documentation around.
developing facilities? hmm... lots of Good and Very Good IDEs (DrPython, Eclipse, KDevelop and Komodo come to mind), unit testing, practically everything Java has in better packaging.
Mono/Gtk# is another alternative only if you don't have Win98 clients (does not work smoothly).
Where did you get the "developer pool size" you mention? I would agree there are more VB developers than cockroaches in the planet, but Python as small base strikes me as very odd.
No offense was meant.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Ok. My point. In my 3million people city, there are at most 10000 good developers and I'm acquainted with circa 2000 of them, having headhunted around a lot etc (*), distributed:
Delphi 1200
VB 700
Java 700
C/C++ 600
Python 600
Perl 100
Capable of picking up python enough to be codemonkeys: 300 more.
You know, obviously, why the numbers do not add up.
(*) I was a PHB for a period of 4 years, and I did a lot of headhunting. I also maintained good relations with a lot of people in a lot of different levels at college. I know what I'm talking about, if we are talking about my specific geographic area.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
The best they can do, in the case of Java, in my Humble Opinion, is to GPL, LGPL, or BSDL the JVM and maybe regulate quality by means of using the Java trademark.
Why? Because then Java will become Free Software with all the goodies that it represents and with all the goodwill of a real community, etc. No Free Software developer would have to fear the comes and goes of the market, because they would have a non-rescindable-at-will license to the code and the ability to fork if needed.
Now, if you agreed with me, you can raise the subject in the next shareholders assembly.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Every experience I've had with Sun Java has been a nightmare. Take the most recent two experiences for example...
- Sun Java required for accessing Brocade SAN switches is unreliable crap. Multiple copies of Sun Java are installed and even with just one copy of the most recent version the Brocade switch interface still doesn't display properly. Every screen refresh shows something different with other things missing.
- On a different machine, installing Sun Java removed MSJVM and also broke the ability to use Cisco VMS and IDS. Wasted a couple hours of my time uninstalling Sun JavaCrap and trying to find a way to download and install MSJVM since Microsoft no longer officially support it.
In the beginning, it simply was a "write once, run anywhere" for the desktop market. Nothing wrong there. Once it ended up on the server side, it was quite effective at eating up Sun's market share, however, as it brought good performance, scalability, stability to the PC market.
The Raven
They also don't know that M$ has an entire /.r's devoted to creating such trolls, including a psychologist and former psy-ops veterans.
/.r's think that instantaneous outrage is evidence of their pushing back against the borg, when in fact large swaths of /. are already controlled by the borg.
department of
most
Welcome to the brave new world of open source.
However, FreeBSD has not actually paid up to have the JVM branded as Java(tm). So Sun says, that's not branded Java, and if you keep saying it is, we will revoke your distribution license. And they did.
It doesn't matter whether FreeBSD calls it "Java", "Mocha", or anything else: Sun has revoked the license to the code and the technology itself; FreeBSD can't ship it under any name.
Java is and remains a proprietary system. Running Java on FreeBSD or Linux is a risky proposition: Sun can revoke your right to do so at any time.
Whether Sun did this intentionally or not, it still illustrates the situation surrounding Java on open platforms perfectly: Sun can revoke the license that lets you run Java on Linux or FreeBSD or anywhere else at any time. Furthermore, whether Sun actually intends to do so or not, it can happen for reasons beyond their control. If it isn't "dropping the ball", they may get acquired, they may go out of business, or they may decide that killing Java for Linux is suddenly in their best business interest.
The upshot of it all is: you're taking a big risk you make a significant investment in Java on any platform other than Solaris.
Microsoft doesn't have any control over Mono: Mono combines the ECMA core (which is clearly free and unencumbered) with standard FOSS libraries like Gnome and Gtk+.
So: using Java is not safe from a legal perspective because Sun owns Java, both the major implementations and the platform itself. On the other hand, using Mono is safe from a legal perspective (at least no less safe than any other free platform) because Microsoft clearly doesn't own it.
Most FreeBSD Java users (myself included) build JDK 1.4 from source.
By agreeing to Sun's source licenses, you have agreed to a lot of legal restrictions on what you can and cannot do. I hope you are aware of those restrictions and disclose them clearly when you participate in other FOSS projects. For example, you will not be able to contribute to GNU gcj or Kaffe.
On OpenBSD the port tells you where to download the relevant files as part of installation : Java 1.4_2 Makefile
Sun won't let you download the JRE/JDK source unless you agree to their license terms. If you do agree to those terms, you become ineligible for participating in many open source projects because the conditions "contaminate" you. BSD seems to be a really brilliant way for Sun to infect a lot of FOSS programmers with their viral license. And unlike the GPL, which can be said to infect software, the Java license contaminates you.
This simply isn't true. I use java all the time. This hasn't hurt my bottom line and I worry very little that it will do so in the future. I find their Java Community Process for software development open enough for my needs and it seems to be so for enough others in the community to keep it a viable language. It is working just about as well as any in the fully open source project world. Certainly, all your concerns also apply to Windows and other proprietary software and most users seem to survive in the current environment. One rarely reads about even a single user dying of starvation because his copy of Win 1.0 was made unavailable. The numbers are certainly even lower for Java developers.
.net drum, but it has even more "internal locks" and catches and has a number of considerable weaknesses with respect to true cross platform development. Sure you can point to various open source clones and this is good, but none to my knowledge come as yet as close to a complete system as Sun has put together. Also, the administrative control of such necessarily more weakly funded entities means Java would likely be less stable going forward. I will freely admit that open source development may improve parts of it, but there is no guarantee that they would improve all of it or even maintain its integrity across all platforms the way Sun has been attempting to do. All end users and second and third party developers will always be at some disadvantage relative
Sun is committed to building a development community around Java, it is growing, Java is improving, and if they let it go, you can be sure that others such as IBM, would be eager to follow up where they might leave off and probably fork Java in the process, which would be most unfortunate to end users and developers alike (it would also be M$'s dream come true). Indeed, I see all this clamor as an indication that eithr some want something for nothing or others want Sun to fail, so that they can reap the spoils of Sun's efforts. This is hardly earth shaking and something that would cause this Java developer to stop using the language.
While it is not the end-all/be-all of a cross platform development language, it is by far the best/most comprehensive thing out there at the moment and has been for some time. While it is true that anyone can download and develop open source for a given project to their own needs, I see limited evidence that open source projects being continually forked by others and then multiple forked projects being sustained on a long term basis. Most development continues with a certain level of consensus within ongoing projects. In theory one can fork, but sustaining the fork independent of the original as an open source project is rare and most forks die out before they actually ever become forks. When the project aim is fully 100% platform compatibility as a goal, it is even rarer. Except, perhaps for GNU C and Perl, I can't think that many other projects with such a large scope. Such a project necessarily requires considerable resources and placing limitations on forking so that progress can be made is not necessarily evil or unreasonable. Neither is making enough money on it to sustain ones efforts, particularly if some of the profits are plowed back into open source software. OpenOffice.org and Netbeans.org are two very good examples of Sun's commitment to open source. Besides, if one is not happy with Java, they don't have to use it. One can always create their own cross platform language. I find that if they do, it will have to be at least as good as Java, to be a source of encouragment not a disadvantage. Maybe a healthy java by Sun can keep M$ honest. I really doubt that an opensource project can be counted on to do so. Perhaps, it can, but I would suggest that multiple backups (troops in reserve) are needed in nipping the ever-reaching tentacles of M$.
Yes, there is a lot of hype surrounding Java (as there is with regard to ANY product), but its not all hype. Sure you can beat the
http://www.findinglisp.com/blog/2004/05/mono-battl e.html
.Net system. Microsoft has stated that they will offer these patents under reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) license terms. This is required by ECMA as a part of the standardization work on .Net that Microsoft is pushing. The trouble is, RAND doesn't necessarily mean free, and it doesn't necessarily mean that you can just use the technology. You may still have to engage with Microsoft to hash out the legal terms.
.Net patent licensing issue, Microsoft could announce terms that while "RAND" are not amenable to FOSS development. Something that is RAND and acceptable to a company like Novell that has a whole legal staff is not necessarily acceptable to a solo developer who finds it difficult to negotiate the Microsoft bureaucracy. As a result, such terms would disrupt a whole bunch of projects and could jeopardize some important pieces of development. Red Hat has suggested using Java or an open source clone based on GCJ and Classpath instead of Mono. And then there is always Python, which Red Hat already uses extensively."
.NET.
"The trouble is that Microsoft seems to have some patents that cover various portions of the
The folks at Red Hat are, rightfully, in my opinion, concerned that Microsoft hasn't stated categorically what the RAND terms are and that Microsoft is obviously not an open source friend. Red Hat fears that if too much development is done on open source projects with Mono before Microsoft clarifies its position on the
And that's just one of the problems with
You act upon the incorrect presumption that Sun's license gives them total control over when and where they can revoke the license. As another ./r observed, the license does NOT grant them this unrestricted/unilateral power. They can revoke the license under certain conditions only. The user can revoke it at any time by simply returning/destroying the software. That does not mean one has to destroy/return code written in java. There is nothing Sun can do to keep you from distributing your Java code or from rewriting it in another language. Your ideas are your own. They do not belong to Sun.
It is quite possible to make the java code freely available to all without restriction. What Sun retains control of is the technology associated with the basic class files of the language itself and key characteristics of the JVM and its implementations. That part of Java, which the coder need not see, belongs to Sun and to Sun's licensee's who follow the letter of their license. In reality, for those who find Java a productive language this is actually good, since it means that others can not take Java internals, transmogrify them into something else and redistribute that as Java. The user gains stability at the expense of not being able to fully modify every aspect of Java. Since what one can do with the language is so vast and flexible, this is usually not an imposition to the average user/developer.
As a Java developer I wholeheartedly disagree that the java internals JVM should be open sourced. This would then given every half-baked idea for improvements on an even par with long used and well thought out implementations that Sun has provided us up to this point. Other vendors, most notably M$ and IBM would then rush in to develop their own flavors and versions and in the process make key decisions on the basis of marketing strategies rather than on technical merits. The way it stands now is that with regard to technical merit they can either become involved in the Java Community Process, which is far more open/organized than most in the open source community seem to take the trouble to notice, or they can go out and build their own system.
For a Java developer like me, the current arrangement provides an extremely important measure of stability to the language that I would loose if the internals were open sourced. With the current system, Java is far more likely to be platform independent than it would be under open source. This would be so because unlike forking within open source projects, the forking of java would involve forking resulting from different hardware implementations (remember the JVM is only an interface between the code and the hardware) and lots of different vendors, who operate according to business logic (not necessarily software logic), and we would soon see multiple versions of java being marketed, with little guarantee that they would work together.
The issue of forking "if needed" is vague as forking is not context free. No, you can't fork other peoples IP and call it your own. Usually most "forking" takes place within a single opensource project and it usually does not evolve into two separate "species" that remain implementing the same task in two different ways. They might for a time, but usually one such fork lacks sufficiency and typically disappears, usually before it gets to the stage of actually becoming a separate project. This is so, because open source programmers often value consensus and functionality more than they do the ability to be totally free of each other's code in every and all situations. This aspect of open source software appeals more to the evangelical rather than those who actually do a lot of collaborative coding. Netbean.org and OpenOffice.org are two good examples of relatively open source Java projects. Does anyone really dispute the usefulness of both as positive contributions to the open source community?
I think to advocate that no open source software be written in Java is a little like cutti
In the end, we're all dead. But I expect that the BSD's will be around longer than Sun, particularly given Sun's ever changing business model. What a bunch of jerks!
I suggest you read On Lisp for more information as to why macros and closures are very different beasts. (Oh, and just in case: I'm not the original poster.)
This kind of crap is exactly what has stopped me from embracing Java. Its owned buy Sun and they make arbitrary decisions concerning its future. I can't depend on its longevity or future compatibility when someone is allowed to make decisions like this. Am I over reacting? Too bad, I'm not going to get stuck rewriting all my code when some idiot decides to pull the plug on something I need.
Pwttpt! I don't want to talk to you no more, you empty headed animal food trough water! I fart in your general direction! You mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
Like rats fleeing a sinking ship, Sun is revoking the licenses!