For what it's worth, I gave normal information in my first answer but you seemed to be looking for problems in specific bits of Oracle text so I thought you were unlikely to be happy without a lawyer's view. Most of us here made our decisions based on the original Sun licences and as long as the licences don't actually worsen we're probably not going to be familiar with the fine print.
I think you've reacted pretty unfairly after many members of this group have put effort in communicating with you. I thank you for pointing me at OpenJFX, a project I'll start following. On Jul 16, 2012 9:59 PM, "Grant Robertson" <gran...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is a generic answer to all those people who jump in on EVERY question > about open-source licensing and just say, "go see a lawyer": > > SERIOUSLY? I'm just a guy who is thinking about writing some software in > a popular programming language. But before I get started I need to go find > a lawyer who specializes in open-source licensing and pay some serious > bucks just so they can give me what will essentially be a guess as to what > would happen if any of this went to court. SERIOUSLY? REALLY? > > > There are a lot of people writing a lot of Java code. The people who > started this Google Group claim to actually know a lot about it. Someone > HAS to actually know the answers to my questions. My questions are more > about policy than about law: > > - Does Oracle require people to register as Licensees just to > distribute their own Java Code? The statement on Oracle's web site is > confusing because they appear to have used the word "compatible" when they > meant to say "functionally identical"? > > Seriously, not a single soul in here knows the answer to that one? Or they > know, but I have to go have a lawyer tell me what Oracle's policy is? > Fortunately, other people elsewhere have given me a clean and unambiguous > answer. (Which I will NOT reveal here, because actual information is > apparently forbidden in this group.) > > My other question was about the accuracy of documentation: > > - Now that Oracle has rolled (or is planning to roll) "commercial > features" into non-commercial (supposedly free) distributions of Java, will > it be easy for me to spot those features so I can avoid using them? > > Again, not a single response that even addresses the actual question. Just > calls to "go all open source all the way" and "go see a lawyer." Do you > guys go see a lawyer before you go to the bathroom? Why do you even respond > at all? Do you sit down and think, "How can I obfuscate information and > frustrate people as much as possible today?" > > If someone had just said, "I'm sorry, I don't know." that would have been > better than all the time-wasting, rabbit-hole digging, obfuscation. > > Needless to say, I will not be participating in this group again. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Java Posse" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/4zruzUP-7EwJ. > To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
