I want to give the freedom to anybody write their plugins, even closed-source, as long as the tool itself is not modified for them to run...At the same time, I do not want any closed-source tool based in MultiMAD code
That's exactly what the LGPL is for.
That's a good question. The first sentence leads me to think he doesn't want ANYONE to modify his code, which LGPL would not be good for. The second sentence seems to imply he just doesn't want closed-source modifying his tool, which LGPL would be good for.
So, IF you don't mind if open-source projects make derivatives of your tool, do LPGL.
IF you would rather people are able to use your tool for free, but you don't want them modifying it no matter who they are, sounds like you don't want open source but proprietary.
I was an interdisciplinary student: Computers, Psychology and Writing. As such, my capstone had to find a way to bridge all 3 that all 3 departments would agree to.
I decided on AI for Games. The game I ended up doing was Mastermind. For the CS side, I did it in Java (which the school had 0 courses in at the time). For the Psychology side, I designed and implemented my own psychological test to be used for the personalities. For the Writing side, I did a Bethsheda-like Q&A to choose a personality.
The first 1/2 of the capstone we had to focus on documentation -- that included everything from goals/objectives to APIs to flowcharting the end product. The second 1/2 was actually writing & testing.
I personally liked what I worked on -- which I think is of extreme importance. You are going to spend long enough on it that it really should be something that you crave to do.
If I would have changed anything, it would have been to make it so that my project was something I could have sold right out of college -- and perhaps skipped the first couple years of the "real world";)
It is interesting to see the various things that get held by a part of the Linux community as Bad about Java end up being Good about Linux... interesting indeed...
The local news station did a story on this recently. They printed some photos at various local stores, and on some home photo printers. They then showed these photos to the public and asked which they liked. Without knowing which was which, people generally chose the home printed ones.
However, as a home photo printer user, I can tell you that I think the paper they use might be different -- more likely to last longer without discoloration. While I have never really had problems on most of my photos, a few did get yellow on the corners. Don't really see that with normal photos. Haven't tried it with in-store digital photos though.
Second, I believe that Speakeasy does not have any sort of agreement with Verizon-owned lines.
Unfortunately, that isn't true. I tried to get Speakeasy so that I could overcome Verizon's unwillingness to upgrade my line. Speakeasy told me that there was nothing they could do, because they would just use the line Verizon provided, and that they could not acquire a different line.
Here, basic ADSL services from our Telecoms provider are charged R270 - R480 - roughly $US40 - $US72 (and that's just for the *line rental*) - that excludes our ISP costs (at least another R200 or $US30) and there is a 3 Gig cap.
I have the exact same price here (Verizon), only I am capped at 384kbps/384kbps because they refuse to upgrade a 26-gauge wire between me and the CO. As such, sounds like your deal is quite a bit better than mine.
Coffee People (Beaverton,OR) has free WiFi. When you first connect (before you mark it as a preferred network), you will notice that the for-charge Starbucks WiFi across the street is available too. IE: You can access either one from either coffee shop.
Realistically, that means that which wifi you want to use will not affect which coffee shop you use (baring the shops turning into faraday cages)...
However, if Coffee People were charging money for usage, I wouldn't pay. I would just wait till I got home or try to connect to one of the other 3-4 networks it detected.
While true, that argument really has little merit. That is like saying MDB is a binary format. So what.
Sometimes "customer" is the root of the tree, but sometimes you want "order item".
Yes, and anyone who has worked with XML or object-oriented databases will show you that is very simple to do. You have a Customer schema, and an Order schema. Big deal. You do the same thing with relational tables.
Sometimes you want many-to-many relationships
When you move away from the idea that ALL of the data has to be maintained in a single XML file, this is very VERY simple to do. And again, relational databases do the same (multiple tables).
Also XML contains multiple types of data (nodes, attributes, implicit node ordering) which is just a smelly design. In the relational model ALL data is in relations, including ordering, nesting, and anything else that XML makes implicit.
You've lost me here. In XML, you have nodes that contain nodes and have attributes. In relational databases, you have tables with rows and columns, and the tables and columns have properties. Also, XML easily supports relationships when you understand my previous comment. As far as ordering goes, that is determined by the schema. Also, I don't see how SQL datatypes are any more relational than the XML data types (which can include SQL datatypes at a whim).
I suggest reading some basic database theory books and then revisiting your ideas.
I have used many forms of databases... Relational, associative, XML-based, Object-oriented, etc. I have even written a few. I have provided feedback on FAQs that dealt with them. What it really comes down to is that your exposure to XML is very limited, and you fail to see that relational databases have drawbacks that other types of databases fix. That is extremely obvious by your comment that the relational data model is the only complete one. My guess is that you use something like MySQL very often and have learned to like it.
The language Tutorial-D in the article you refer to is yet another language for relational databases! Darwen and Date are critics of SQL implementations; they are NOT critics of the relational database as you imply. They are instead the strongest relational database proponents.
Yes, I understand that Tutorial-D is an attempt to make a more-correct implementation. I was mostly referring to these two comments from said article:
Relational databases as we know them today are, however, far from optimal - at more than one level.
and
It should come as no surprise, then, that work has been going on for some years to devise a more correct alternative to the relational database as we know it today.
Perhaps I overstated it -- but the point that CURRENT implementations (which is what most would suggest to use instead) are not that good still remains.
XML:A document mixes data with layout (presentation).
XML, used correctly, should include NO presentation in the XML data file itself. That is to be left up to the XSL. Even when using XHTML, it should be left up to the CSS. When I refer to an XML database, there is no presentation whatsoever in the XML file.
Furthermore, the structure of the document is not such that it lends itself to the kind of inferences that are made from databases. What is the atomicity, selectivity, and correctness for a document base?
That is the purpose of the XSD (or DTD or RelaxNG, or whatever you prefer). Using XSD, you have a very large amount of control over the structure of the document.
A data model is a collection of descriptions of data structures and their contained fields, together with the operations or functions that manipulate them.
A data model is the structure in which a computer program stores persistent information.
A method for describing data structures and a set of operations used to manipulate and validate that data
A data model is a description of the organization of data that is stored in a computer system.
A description of a specification and representation paradigm for data. (I really like this one personally)
The logical means of organization of data for use in an information system.
That's probably enough definitions... Based on those, it would seem that RDF, XML (when using an XSD or DTD), SQL, even the filesystem itself would qualify as data models.
I think your assumption that only relational databases are valid is a bit presumpuous. That is the reason why most XML databases are not true XML databases -- because many of them store their data via SQL in the background. Some ( http://www.techworld.com/applications/features/ind ex.cfm?featureid=910 ) would even suggest that relational databases are NOT a good or optimal solution.
Regular LED drivers are even usually used for OLED (though you loose all of the advantages of the 0-energy-unless-image-changing aspect of passive OLED).
Although you won't usually print anything at higher than 300(ink jet) or 600(laser) dpi, I recommend that for archival purposes to go ahead and scan at full-color 1200dpi from within Photoshop or something.
I would make sure to backup all your originals onto a DVD DL (Dual Layer) drive as you can now get the drives for about $50 and they can use CDRW, DVD+/-RW or DVD DL disks as your space/income allows.
Storage really should be done inside some kind of database, even if it is a file-oriented database, instead of you trying to manage the hierarchy directly. This would also likely add the benefit of making searching and indexing easier.
Though you probably have the physical magazine, file a report against them at http://www.ifccfbi.gov/index.asp and then tell NorthShoreAgency that you have filed a fraud complaint against them with the FCC and the FBI and give them the reference number.
First of all, while I understand that someone may want to know which license to use for their new project, a quick search of/. would have shown that this topic has been beaten to death and that roadkill has more life in it. This topic comes up again and again and again. In general, most of/. (not including myself) prefer GPL over BSD. Here's a few pros/cons about them both.... though I will try to remain impartial, I realize I may not completely succeed.
The first thing to realize is that 'free software' and 'open-source software' means different things to the BSD and GPL camps. The GPL camps see it as free/open only if it ensures that it will always remain so. The BSD cames see it as free/open only if I can do whatever the hell I want with it. As should be obvious to anyone, these two CAN be mutually exclusive in some situations.
Corporations are where the two diverge greatly. Most corporations have no problems running/modifying BSD code but refuse to even look at GPL code. This has advantages and disadvantages to both the BSD and GPL camps.
To better understand this, let's use an example. Joe Bob writes a new version of grep that is 1000 times faster. When trying to licenses his software, he realizes he has way to many options to choose from. He decides to license it either GPL or BSD -- but which one?
If he licenses it BSD, everyone (and I mean absolutely everyone -- it is 1000 times faster afterall) will use it. He probably will not make any money at all off of it, but... whenever he logs into his Unix or Windows box, doing 'grep' or 'find' or 'search from the Windows Folder' will be much faster. In fact, he would have changed the world for the better -- even though no one may know he was involved. Chances are, some people like Microsoft might make further modifications to his software, making it faster, and only Microsoft would benefit from that change. At first he could be pissed off that no one else benefits from M$ changes (until he realizes they probably broke it somehow) -- or he could be happy that Google and Windows and Unix are all faster and that his (and everyone else's lifes) are better for it.
If he licenses it GPL, many Linux hackers will use it, but rarely anyone else. Most corporations won't do it, Google won't do it, Windows won't do it. BSD and Mac OSX probably won't even do it. Linux probably would. As such, Google isn't any faster, the windows search button isn't any faster, his ISP's BSD account isn't any faster, but his Linux box is. It's possible that Windows would take it, use it, lie about it, pay someone off, etc -- but... let's just ignore GPL-violations for the moment. Joe has ensured that any modifications made to his code will be recontributed back, but at the cost of widespread usage. If he is really into Linux, perhaps that is a good solution. If his goal was to have widespread worldwide usage, on the other hand, that will never happen. In fact, he might write an article explaining the concept and how he came up with it -- at which point, others (proprietary, BSD, etc) will all re-invent the wheel and thus put him back in the position of the further contributions not coming back.
So, this may seem like a catch-22... You either have to allow people to steal your code, or you have widespread usage -- but not both. And that is the primary reason the two camps continue to disagree to this day.
What should you do? You should determine what your primary motivation is. Do you want to know how everyone modifies it? Do you want everyone to use it? Do you want to ensure that your version of it is persisted forever (perhaps Public Domain)? Your motivations for where you see your code going (and and children it might have) should be what drives your choice of license.
After reading a few comments on here, I thought I would share some personal experience from Oregon.
Ashland Fiber Network http://www.ashlandfiber.net/ (Ashland,OR) is shared by all utilities in Ashland (population @ 21k) -- it is community owned
The Portland,OR metro still doesn't have fiber access
Verizon FIOS is not planned to be installed in the Portland metro for quite some time (no ETA)
World Wide Packets business model is to provide the infrastructure for ISPs to provide fiber to the end user, but they don't work directly with end-users
6 years ago [Beaverton,OR], I had Telocity SDSL for $20/mo @ 802/802
3 years ago [Beaverton,OR], when I tried to sign up for 1.5/768 Verizon DSL, we found out (after they set us up and started charging for said speed) that the best we can get is 384/384 for $60/mo ($40 Line[Verizon] + $20 ISP [Aracnet]) because of a 26-gauge wire between me and the C.O. They also stated there is no intention to ever upgrade that line unless it is damaged. Of course, they wouldn't tell me where it was.
A few months after talking with Speakeasy about the last bullet point, they sent me a letter saying that they could get me 6MB/768 over their fiber network without using Verizon's phone line. When I called them, they said that they couldn't because it still has to go over Verizon's line. Of course, they still wanted me to try to set it up, without installing a replacement for that 26-gauge wire.
All in all, I think Ashland has it made. Community-owned fiber network that the cable companies and phone companies have to pay to use -- and you don't HAVE to go through any one of them to get service from a 3rd party. I wish Beaverton would do that.
1) Many of us are very quick typers -- not hunting and pecking the specific letters needed 2) Many of us never use spell checkers -- unlike the average college student, secretary, or employee of days past 3) Many of us realize that it will have absolutely no impact on our job -- ie: we know our stuff and management will overlook certain things because of it 4) Many of us regularly skipped classes or left high school / college early 5) Many of us don't care 6) Many of us created the common netspeak because it was faster to type -- for example, 'dunno', 'wtf', 'rtfm', 'l8r', whatever -- thus, spelling became less important 7) I honestly believe that you would find that the same people making those spelling/grammar mistakes would provide much cleaner prose were it for a grant application, etc -- ie: where the text is being used is a lot less important
Well, that's just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
How can a computer geek relate the evil in patenting algorithms to a non-computer geek to where it will have an effective impact?
Perhaps by relating to something he might be used to... Not that this is the right example, but you could equate algorithms to choosing a path through town -- one might take into account time (rush hour?), construction, freeways / surface streets, etc... but he wouldn't allow someone to patent a specific route between his house and his job.
I'm sure you can come up with a better example, that was just one off the top of my head early after getting to work through rush hour;)
Pardon me if this is completely off-base, but I only switched from CVS to Subversion about a week ago.
Couldn't you use svn:externals to do what you want? I mean, couldn't you have a 'live' project or something that simply listed whatever tag you wanted in your externals? Then, whenever you get the 'live' site, it would get whichever tag was currently referenced?
Actually, they don't have final say. Apache has the same vote that Sun does on the JCP Executive Committee. All Sun has is a permanent seat on the board.
Actually, I am doing that now. I am currently running the Linux JVM on top of the Linux compatability layer. No difficulties getting it installed or running.
This conversation has actually been on/. many many times.
Although there are some arguments about what the GPL actually says, generally the conclusion is: 1) If the JVM itself is GPL, you could run non-GPL code on it 2) If the core-libraries are GPL, you could NOT run non-GPL code on it (ie: if the Object class alone was GPL you couldn't) 3) If the core-libraries are LGPL, you could run non-gpl code on it (since you are linking to it) 4) most companies are unwilling to use GPL software/libraries becaues they aren't able to use the license restrictions on their own products -- thus, they go for BSD, MIT, or Apache licenses. 5) Most GPL advocates believe the JCP licensing is not open source, though it requires that JSRs can have open-source alternatives written 6) Most JCP advocates believe the JCP licensing is open source, since they don't have to pay to use or implement the JSRs; and because they don't have to use their license for their own products 7) Most JCP and GPL advocates believe that Apache licensing is free/open. 8) Dual-licensing is tricky, and some companies are afraid of using it 9) Most dual-licensing is GPL or Commercial. While dual licensing would allow for GPL or Apache licensing, most GPL advocates would complain that it would not require people to contribute back to the community 10) When people don't like, are afraid of, or can't use existing licenses, they tend to find or foster alternative licensing solutions.
According to the news the other day, it would include not just transportation, but also any federal services....
I can see it now. Nope, sorry, we aren't allowing Oregonians to pay their Federal Taxes until the state complies with the national ID law. however, we are charging you 150% interest / day for not paying on time.
Slashdot Mirror
C# based? Um, no thanks.
That's exactly what the LGPL is for.
That's a good question. The first sentence leads me to think he doesn't want ANYONE to modify his code, which LGPL would not be good for. The second sentence seems to imply he just doesn't want closed-source modifying his tool, which LGPL would be good for.
So, IF you don't mind if open-source projects make derivatives of your tool, do LPGL.
IF you would rather people are able to use your tool for free, but you don't want them modifying it no matter who they are, sounds like you don't want open source but proprietary.
I was an interdisciplinary student: Computers, Psychology and Writing. As such, my capstone had to find a way to bridge all 3 that all 3 departments would agree to.
;)
I decided on AI for Games. The game I ended up doing was Mastermind. For the CS side, I did it in Java (which the school had 0 courses in at the time). For the Psychology side, I designed and implemented my own psychological test to be used for the personalities. For the Writing side, I did a Bethsheda-like Q&A to choose a personality.
The first 1/2 of the capstone we had to focus on documentation -- that included everything from goals/objectives to APIs to flowcharting the end product. The second 1/2 was actually writing & testing.
I personally liked what I worked on -- which I think is of extreme importance. You are going to spend long enough on it that it really should be something that you crave to do.
If I would have changed anything, it would have been to make it so that my project was something I could have sold right out of college -- and perhaps skipped the first couple years of the "real world"
It is interesting to see the various things that get held by a part of the Linux community as Bad about Java end up being Good about Linux... interesting indeed...
The local news station did a story on this recently. They printed some photos at various local stores, and on some home photo printers. They then showed these photos to the public and asked which they liked. Without knowing which was which, people generally chose the home printed ones.
However, as a home photo printer user, I can tell you that I think the paper they use might be different -- more likely to last longer without discoloration. While I have never really had problems on most of my photos, a few did get yellow on the corners. Don't really see that with normal photos. Haven't tried it with in-store digital photos though.
Coffee People (Beaverton,OR) has free WiFi. When you first connect (before you mark it as a preferred network), you will notice that the for-charge Starbucks WiFi across the street is available too. IE: You can access either one from either coffee shop.
Realistically, that means that which wifi you want to use will not affect which coffee shop you use (baring the shops turning into faraday cages)...
However, if Coffee People were charging money for usage, I wouldn't pay. I would just wait till I got home or try to connect to one of the other 3-4 networks it detected.
- A data model is a collection of descriptions of data structures and their contained fields, together with the operations or functions that manipulate them.
- A data model is the structure in which a computer program stores persistent information.
- A method for describing data structures and a set of operations used to manipulate and validate that data
- A data model is a description of the organization of data that is stored in a computer system.
- A description of a specification and representation paradigm for data. (I really like this one personally)
- The logical means of organization of data for use in an information system.
That's probably enough definitions... Based on those, it would seem that RDF, XML (when using an XSD or DTD), SQL, even the filesystem itself would qualify as data models. I think your assumption that only relational databases are valid is a bit presumpuous. That is the reason why most XML databases are not true XML databases -- because many of them store their data via SQL in the background. Some ( http://www.techworld.com/applications/features/inWhen you say that they don't look like OLED, what do you mean?
Do you mean that it doesn't look as good as this SVGA OLED http://www.emagin.com/images/svgamck.jpg (or even their UXGA one)?
Regular LED drivers are even usually used for OLED (though you loose all of the advantages of the 0-energy-unless-image-changing aspect of passive OLED).
Although I am sure that there are better models now, this is the scanner I am still using:
http://avdcs.com/prod/cards/fb1200.html
Although you won't usually print anything at higher than 300(ink jet) or 600(laser) dpi, I recommend that for archival purposes to go ahead and scan at full-color 1200dpi from within Photoshop or something.
I would make sure to backup all your originals onto a DVD DL (Dual Layer) drive as you can now get the drives for about $50 and they can use CDRW, DVD+/-RW or DVD DL disks as your space/income allows.
Storage really should be done inside some kind of database, even if it is a file-oriented database, instead of you trying to manage the hierarchy directly. This would also likely add the benefit of making searching and indexing easier.
Though you probably have the physical magazine, file a report against them at http://www.ifccfbi.gov/index.asp and then tell NorthShoreAgency that you have filed a fraud complaint against them with the FCC and the FBI and give them the reference number.
First of all, while I understand that someone may want to know which license to use for their new project, a quick search of /. would have shown that this topic has been beaten to death and that roadkill has more life in it. This topic comes up again and again and again. In general, most of /. (not including myself) prefer GPL over BSD. Here's a few pros/cons about them both.... though I will try to remain impartial, I realize I may not completely succeed.
The first thing to realize is that 'free software' and 'open-source software' means different things to the BSD and GPL camps. The GPL camps see it as free/open only if it ensures that it will always remain so. The BSD cames see it as free/open only if I can do whatever the hell I want with it. As should be obvious to anyone, these two CAN be mutually exclusive in some situations.
Corporations are where the two diverge greatly. Most corporations have no problems running/modifying BSD code but refuse to even look at GPL code. This has advantages and disadvantages to both the BSD and GPL camps.
To better understand this, let's use an example. Joe Bob writes a new version of grep that is 1000 times faster. When trying to licenses his software, he realizes he has way to many options to choose from. He decides to license it either GPL or BSD -- but which one?
If he licenses it BSD, everyone (and I mean absolutely everyone -- it is 1000 times faster afterall) will use it. He probably will not make any money at all off of it, but... whenever he logs into his Unix or Windows box, doing 'grep' or 'find' or 'search from the Windows Folder' will be much faster. In fact, he would have changed the world for the better -- even though no one may know he was involved. Chances are, some people like Microsoft might make further modifications to his software, making it faster, and only Microsoft would benefit from that change. At first he could be pissed off that no one else benefits from M$ changes (until he realizes they probably broke it somehow) -- or he could be happy that Google and Windows and Unix are all faster and that his (and everyone else's lifes) are better for it.
If he licenses it GPL, many Linux hackers will use it, but rarely anyone else. Most corporations won't do it, Google won't do it, Windows won't do it. BSD and Mac OSX probably won't even do it. Linux probably would. As such, Google isn't any faster, the windows search button isn't any faster, his ISP's BSD account isn't any faster, but his Linux box is. It's possible that Windows would take it, use it, lie about it, pay someone off, etc -- but... let's just ignore GPL-violations for the moment. Joe has ensured that any modifications made to his code will be recontributed back, but at the cost of widespread usage. If he is really into Linux, perhaps that is a good solution. If his goal was to have widespread worldwide usage, on the other hand, that will never happen. In fact, he might write an article explaining the concept and how he came up with it -- at which point, others (proprietary, BSD, etc) will all re-invent the wheel and thus put him back in the position of the further contributions not coming back.
So, this may seem like a catch-22... You either have to allow people to steal your code, or you have widespread usage -- but not both. And that is the primary reason the two camps continue to disagree to this day.
What should you do? You should determine what your primary motivation is. Do you want to know how everyone modifies it? Do you want everyone to use it? Do you want to ensure that your version of it is persisted forever (perhaps Public Domain)? Your motivations for where you see your code going (and and children it might have) should be what drives your choice of license.
Malachi
No problem. I am still trying to locate an alternative. Just emailed XO (they don't list their pricing on their website, which is never a good sign).
- Ashland Fiber Network http://www.ashlandfiber.net/ (Ashland,OR) is shared by all utilities in Ashland (population @ 21k) -- it is community owned
- The Portland,OR metro still doesn't have fiber access
- Verizon FIOS is not planned to be installed in the Portland metro for quite some time (no ETA)
- World Wide Packets business model is to provide the infrastructure for ISPs to provide fiber to the end user, but they don't work directly with end-users
- 6 years ago [Beaverton,OR], I had Telocity SDSL for $20/mo @ 802/802
- 3 years ago [Beaverton,OR], when I tried to sign up for 1.5/768 Verizon DSL, we found out (after they set us up and started charging for said speed) that the best we can get is 384/384 for $60/mo ($40 Line[Verizon] + $20 ISP [Aracnet]) because of a 26-gauge wire between me and the C.O. They also stated there is no intention to ever upgrade that line unless it is damaged. Of course, they wouldn't tell me where it was.
- A few months after talking with Speakeasy about the last bullet point, they sent me a letter saying that they could get me 6MB/768 over their fiber network without using Verizon's phone line. When I called them, they said that they couldn't because it still has to go over Verizon's line. Of course, they still wanted me to try to set it up, without installing a replacement for that 26-gauge wire.
All in all, I think Ashland has it made. Community-owned fiber network that the cable companies and phone companies have to pay to use -- and you don't HAVE to go through any one of them to get service from a 3rd party. I wish Beaverton would do that.There are a few things that come to mind easily.
1) Many of us are very quick typers -- not hunting and pecking the specific letters needed
2) Many of us never use spell checkers -- unlike the average college student, secretary, or employee of days past
3) Many of us realize that it will have absolutely no impact on our job -- ie: we know our stuff and management will overlook certain things because of it
4) Many of us regularly skipped classes or left high school / college early
5) Many of us don't care
6) Many of us created the common netspeak because it was faster to type -- for example, 'dunno', 'wtf', 'rtfm', 'l8r', whatever -- thus, spelling became less important
7) I honestly believe that you would find that the same people making those spelling/grammar mistakes would provide much cleaner prose were it for a grant application, etc -- ie: where the text is being used is a lot less important
Well, that's just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
Perhaps by relating to something he might be used to... Not that this is the right example, but you could equate algorithms to choosing a path through town -- one might take into account time (rush hour?), construction, freeways / surface streets, etc... but he wouldn't allow someone to patent a specific route between his house and his job.
I'm sure you can come up with a better example, that was just one off the top of my head early after getting to work through rush hour ;)
You don't want to cold canvas. That's a good way to ensure they never call you back.
Try dice.com
Pardon me if this is completely off-base, but I only switched from CVS to Subversion about a week ago.
Couldn't you use svn:externals to do what you want? I mean, couldn't you have a 'live' project or something that simply listed whatever tag you wanted in your externals? Then, whenever you get the 'live' site, it would get whichever tag was currently referenced?
Instructions are at http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.0/ch07s03.html
Actually, they don't have final say. Apache has the same vote that Sun does on the JCP Executive Committee. All Sun has is a permanent seat on the board.
Actually, I am doing that now. I am currently running the Linux JVM on top of the Linux compatability layer. No difficulties getting it installed or running.
This conversation has actually been on /. many many times.
Although there are some arguments about what the GPL actually says, generally the conclusion is:
1) If the JVM itself is GPL, you could run non-GPL code on it
2) If the core-libraries are GPL, you could NOT run non-GPL code on it (ie: if the Object class alone was GPL you couldn't)
3) If the core-libraries are LGPL, you could run non-gpl code on it (since you are linking to it)
4) most companies are unwilling to use GPL software/libraries becaues they aren't able to use the license restrictions on their own products -- thus, they go for BSD, MIT, or Apache licenses.
5) Most GPL advocates believe the JCP licensing is not open source, though it requires that JSRs can have open-source alternatives written
6) Most JCP advocates believe the JCP licensing is open source, since they don't have to pay to use or implement the JSRs; and because they don't have to use their license for their own products
7) Most JCP and GPL advocates believe that Apache licensing is free/open.
8) Dual-licensing is tricky, and some companies are afraid of using it
9) Most dual-licensing is GPL or Commercial. While dual licensing would allow for GPL or Apache licensing, most GPL advocates would complain that it would not require people to contribute back to the community
10) When people don't like, are afraid of, or can't use existing licenses, they tend to find or foster alternative licensing solutions.
Did I miss anything?
According to the news the other day, it would include not just transportation, but also any federal services....
I can see it now. Nope, sorry, we aren't allowing Oregonians to pay their Federal Taxes until the state complies with the national ID law. however, we are charging you 150% interest / day for not paying on time.