[OT} Re: So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

Some people complained about this, but I don't want some things 
unanswered.  So just ignore if you don't care.


Endre Stølsvik wrote:
| 
| I'm not sure how to answer this.  I believe you are a little confused about

| how the JCP works and what we're doing here, and people are asking for.
| 
| First, we aren't advocating changes in the way Java SE specification is

| defined.

So you still want the JCP? Run by Sun? Or by who?


My point is that we are implementing a specification, and our individual 
or collective opinions about the JCP are irrelevant here.


Join the jcp-open list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for JCP related 
discussion.




| 
| Second, the Java SE specification - the 'standard' you refer to - is already

| defined by multiple companies and individuals that work on the Java SE
| specification Expert Group, of which Sun is the Spec Lead.

Hm.. I haven't quite come to see it that way: If you read some of the 
blogs and whatnots on the Mustang pages: "Today I added this method, oh 
yes!" and "Well, we whipped up this thing five minutes ago!". I don't 
think a new method in java.lang.String is discussed back and forth in the 
JCP before some Sun guy just makes it.

  But I might just be mistaken.


I don't know.  If you think there's an issue, simply call them on it - 
or write to the JCP Executive Committee, or write to me (on jcp-open or 
privately) as the Apache EC rep.




| 
| That's an orthogonal issue, independent of implementation of specifications.


I don't think so, and I guess that's where I feel something is lacking in 
many comments I read around in the java communities: "oh my god, like, 
open source java NOW, dummies!", while not thinking about the processes 
behind the different scenes.


But I think that here, we have a very serious goal, and that's to 
implement the spec in OSS.  Sure, we'd love to see Sun OSS their 
implementation, but as we said before, that decision is up to them. 
It's their property.


We're putting our money where our mouth is, so to speak.



| 
| In fact, it's clear to me that OSS in Java EE has had a very positive effect

| on both evolving the spec for users (i.e. the Spring and Hibernate influence
| on Java EE/EJB3) as well as making the technology available to end-users at a
| faster pace.

I didn't know that there was that big a difference between EE and SE 
regarding licensing / open source, so obviously I have missed out on some 
points here.. Do you have any good links laying around?


I don't understand.  EE and SE are licensed the same.



| 
| What's the "Swing issue"?


The "missing TCK trick":
  http://danesecooper.blogs.com/divablog/2006/05/what_sun_doesnt.html

I read that in this thread, and have heard it mentioned before: The GUI 
parts of "java standards" are a somewhat convoluted area.


I have no material information, but a UI is a hard thing to spec and a 
hard thing to test.


That said, there are no shared-source requirements in a JCP 2.5+ 
implementation or TCK.  We will implement according to the spec, and 
test with the TCK.  That's all we can do.


Our goal is to produce Swing/AWT so that users programs run as they 
expect.  It's going to be a lot of work.


[SNIP]

But, open source the _implementation_, and keep the JCP as it is, with Sun 
having a special position?


I'll happily share my personal opinion on jcp-open but this is 
irrelevant to Harmony. :)


We're just here to implement and certify an compatible implementation.

geir


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Etienne Gagnon]

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Now, let's go back to let the code speak.

+1  ;-)

-- 
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D.http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM:   http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC:   http://www.sablecc.org/


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Chris Gray wrote:
> Geir,
> 
> I'll grant you that Sun could handle the Java community much worse than they 
> do, but I still don't agree that having such a corporation in charge is a 
> Good Thing. Or maybe I'm just being old-fashioned, and we should get rid of 
> all those fuddy-duddy organisations like IETF or W3C and replace them by 
> dynamic share-holder-value-driven corporations. :-)

Chris,

evolutions are more effective than resolutions because they are more
easily reversible and if we apply basic thermodynamical principles to
complex systems (including social ones), entropy (aka disorder)
increases only when there are irreversible changes.

Apache has been able to achieve many wonderful things with very high
social energy efficiency because of the above (which is easier to do
when you have a volunteer organization full of naturally lazy people, I
must say).

I have not participated in the Java SE expert group at the JCP, but I
know the people from Apache that had.

Harmony is not about changing the way Java specs are designed or cooked,
or whether or not that's good or bad. That's another story and it's a
completely separate concern which doesn't really belong here.

We are deeply thankful to Sun for having slowly but surely continued to
open up Java at evolutionary steps and the collective wealth generated
by this was tremendous (some Sun's stock owners would have liked to have
a share of that wealth, but that's life)

I owe Sun a lot for that and my push for Harmony is to help them back,
realizing that there is a lot that can be gained by harvesting that
wealth that they helped generating, and not a lot to lose.

There is no need for an hostile takeover to a company that was rarely
hostile in the first place.

No, I'm not in love with the JCP, the java IP situation, the TCK NDA,
the lack of Swing TCK and a bunch of other issues, but could be a lot worse.

Our goal here is to get Harmony certified.

What happens after that is honestly a little premature to forecast, but
a JVM built by the java people for the java people can only go in one
direction: compatibility.

The ASF has a 8-years-old continuous record of that.

Now, let's go back to let the code speak.

-- 
Stefano.


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Tim Ellison]

Folks, this is a -dev list.  There are any number of opinion forums
elsewhere where you'll get a broader interest in your point of view.

Let's talk code.
Tim

Endre Stølsvik wrote:
> | 
> | I'm not sure how to answer this.  I believe you are a little confused about
> | how the JCP works and what we're doing here, and people are asking for.
> | 
> | First, we aren't advocating changes in the way Java SE specification is
> | defined.
> 
> So you still want the JCP? Run by Sun? Or by who?
> 
> | 
> | Second, the Java SE specification - the 'standard' you refer to - is already
> | defined by multiple companies and individuals that work on the Java SE
> | specification Expert Group, of which Sun is the Spec Lead.
> 
> Hm.. I haven't quite come to see it that way: If you read some of the 
> blogs and whatnots on the Mustang pages: "Today I added this method, oh 
> yes!" and "Well, we whipped up this thing five minutes ago!". I don't 
> think a new method in java.lang.String is discussed back and forth in the 
> JCP before some Sun guy just makes it.
>   But I might just be mistaken.
> 
> | 
> | That's an orthogonal issue, independent of implementation of specifications.
> 
> I don't think so, and I guess that's where I feel something is lacking in 
> many comments I read around in the java communities: "oh my god, like, 
> open source java NOW, dummies!", while not thinking about the processes 
> behind the different scenes.
> 
> | 
> | In fact, it's clear to me that OSS in Java EE has had a very positive effect
> | on both evolving the spec for users (i.e. the Spring and Hibernate influence
> | on Java EE/EJB3) as well as making the technology available to end-users at 
> a
> | faster pace.
> 
> I didn't know that there was that big a difference between EE and SE 
> regarding licensing / open source, so obviously I have missed out on some 
> points here.. Do you have any good links laying around?
> 
> | 
> | What's the "Swing issue"?
> 
> The "missing TCK trick":
>   http://danesecooper.blogs.com/divablog/2006/05/what_sun_doesnt.html
> 
> I read that in this thread, and have heard it mentioned before: The GUI 
> parts of "java standards" are a somewhat convoluted area.
> 
> | 
> | > 
> | > PS: How do you folks feel about Tiger's development model?
> | 
> | Do you mean Mustang via "Project Peabody"? 
> 
> *blush*, obviously!
> 
> | I like the community aspect - it was a great step forward for Sun - and 
> | could be improved by adding committers from other companies and making 
> | the code available under an open source license.
> 
> Yes, that's what I think too - I really don't see the big difference 
> between that and e.g. Tomcat. Go suggest some feature or submit some code 
> to Tomcat - and be sure that not everything is immediately accepted into 
> the codebase. The only difference is basically that you cannot fork the 
> Sun JDK. (And that Sun just suddenly may change their mind in the future - 
> but so can a open source project, in particular the new "try before you 
> buy"-style uses of the GPL, where the copyright for all code is retained 
> by one particular company.).
> 
> But this is also the place where I find the comments about "today I rammed 
> in this new little method - whaddayouthink?". Proving, to me at least, 
> that Sun's developers have direct access to the CVS, while the rest of the 
> world doesn't. Which I don't find that bad, as long as they pour lots of 
> money over the process, w/o asking for much back!
> 
> It could obviously still be improved - I guess they should listen a little 
> more, be more accepting, whatever - get "a real community" going. But 
> that's so much hassle! ;)
> 
> | 
> | > 
> | > PPS: Why does Sun really bother to pour money into Java at all? The 
> reason,
> | > I've come to understand, _was_ that they then could sell a bunch of their
> | > big-iron boxes to companies when the small intel-servers couldn't cope 
> with
> | > a success of their developed java code. That argument is gone some years 
> ago
> | > - so what's really in it for Sun, other than prestige?
> | 
> | To be frank, IMO it's leverage over a major control point in the software
> | industry, which doesn't need to change if they OSS their implementation.
> 
> Yes, and they made this rather wonderful thing. Don't they deserve _some_ 
> particular _influence_ over it still? Really, I'm kinda sad that Sun 
> doesn't earn plenty-o-cash, given what they've given to the OSS scene and 
> the brave thing they did when CPU's still were named with numbers, and the 
> gigahertz could be counted on your digits: a new, friendly OO language, 
> Java, on a radically new platform-independent platform (!), the JVM. And 
> they've even tried to put some barriers in the road for total MS 
> domination - which apparently have backfired or not worked out very well..
> 
> But, open source the _implementation_, and keep the JCP as it is, with Sun 
> having a special position?
> 
> Regards,
> Endre.
> 
> -

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Chris Gray]

Geir,

I'll grant you that Sun could handle the Java community much worse than they 
do, but I still don't agree that having such a corporation in charge is a 
Good Thing. Or maybe I'm just being old-fashioned, and we should get rid of 
all those fuddy-duddy organisations like IETF or W3C and replace them by 
dynamic share-holder-value-driven corporations. :-)

Chris wie-so-gibts-keine-DDR-mehr Gray

On Friday 19 May 2006 14:57, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Chris Gray wrote:
> >> Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
> >> follow and adhere to. If this "standard" is defined rather more by one
> >> company than the rest - what is the real problem?
> >
> > The real problem is that if that company also markets an implementation
> > of the standard, there will always be forces within the company which
> > view all other implementations as competitors.
>
> Yes, but... :)
>
> It *is* one of the interesting things about the Java ecosystem - we are
> all able to all work together in creating the specifications via the JCP
> process, and then compete on implementation.
>
> It seems to have worked pretty well so far.
>
> geir
>
> -
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Chris Gray/k/ Embedded Java Solutions  BE0503765045
Embedded & Mobile Java, OSGihttp://www.k-embedded-java.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +32 3 216 0369


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Endre Stølsvik]

| 
| I'm not sure how to answer this.  I believe you are a little confused about
| how the JCP works and what we're doing here, and people are asking for.
| 
| First, we aren't advocating changes in the way Java SE specification is
| defined.

So you still want the JCP? Run by Sun? Or by who?

| 
| Second, the Java SE specification - the 'standard' you refer to - is already
| defined by multiple companies and individuals that work on the Java SE
| specification Expert Group, of which Sun is the Spec Lead.

Hm.. I haven't quite come to see it that way: If you read some of the 
blogs and whatnots on the Mustang pages: "Today I added this method, oh 
yes!" and "Well, we whipped up this thing five minutes ago!". I don't 
think a new method in java.lang.String is discussed back and forth in the 
JCP before some Sun guy just makes it.
  But I might just be mistaken.

| 
| That's an orthogonal issue, independent of implementation of specifications.

I don't think so, and I guess that's where I feel something is lacking in 
many comments I read around in the java communities: "oh my god, like, 
open source java NOW, dummies!", while not thinking about the processes 
behind the different scenes.

| 
| In fact, it's clear to me that OSS in Java EE has had a very positive effect
| on both evolving the spec for users (i.e. the Spring and Hibernate influence
| on Java EE/EJB3) as well as making the technology available to end-users at a
| faster pace.

I didn't know that there was that big a difference between EE and SE 
regarding licensing / open source, so obviously I have missed out on some 
points here.. Do you have any good links laying around?

| 
| What's the "Swing issue"?

The "missing TCK trick":
  http://danesecooper.blogs.com/divablog/2006/05/what_sun_doesnt.html

I read that in this thread, and have heard it mentioned before: The GUI 
parts of "java standards" are a somewhat convoluted area.

| 
| > 
| > PS: How do you folks feel about Tiger's development model?
| 
| Do you mean Mustang via "Project Peabody"? 

*blush*, obviously!

| I like the community aspect - it was a great step forward for Sun - and 
| could be improved by adding committers from other companies and making 
| the code available under an open source license.

Yes, that's what I think too - I really don't see the big difference 
between that and e.g. Tomcat. Go suggest some feature or submit some code 
to Tomcat - and be sure that not everything is immediately accepted into 
the codebase. The only difference is basically that you cannot fork the 
Sun JDK. (And that Sun just suddenly may change their mind in the future - 
but so can a open source project, in particular the new "try before you 
buy"-style uses of the GPL, where the copyright for all code is retained 
by one particular company.).

But this is also the place where I find the comments about "today I rammed 
in this new little method - whaddayouthink?". Proving, to me at least, 
that Sun's developers have direct access to the CVS, while the rest of the 
world doesn't. Which I don't find that bad, as long as they pour lots of 
money over the process, w/o asking for much back!

It could obviously still be improved - I guess they should listen a little 
more, be more accepting, whatever - get "a real community" going. But 
that's so much hassle! ;)

| 
| > 
| > PPS: Why does Sun really bother to pour money into Java at all? The reason,
| > I've come to understand, _was_ that they then could sell a bunch of their
| > big-iron boxes to companies when the small intel-servers couldn't cope with
| > a success of their developed java code. That argument is gone some years ago
| > - so what's really in it for Sun, other than prestige?
| 
| To be frank, IMO it's leverage over a major control point in the software
| industry, which doesn't need to change if they OSS their implementation.

Yes, and they made this rather wonderful thing. Don't they deserve _some_ 
particular _influence_ over it still? Really, I'm kinda sad that Sun 
doesn't earn plenty-o-cash, given what they've given to the OSS scene and 
the brave thing they did when CPU's still were named with numbers, and the 
gigahertz could be counted on your digits: a new, friendly OO language, 
Java, on a radically new platform-independent platform (!), the JVM. And 
they've even tried to put some barriers in the road for total MS 
domination - which apparently have backfired or not worked out very well..

But, open source the _implementation_, and keep the JCP as it is, with Sun 
having a special position?

Regards,
Endre.

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Endre Stølsvik]

On Fri, 19 May 2006, Chris Gray wrote:

| 
| > Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
| > follow and adhere to. If this "standard" is defined rather more by one
| > company than the rest - what is the real problem?
| 
| The real problem is that if that company also markets an implementation of 
the 
| standard, there will always be forces within the company which view all other 
| implementations as competitors.

How is this evident - how does it manifest itself?

I do understand that there are some friction, though - "It's _ours_!", and 
they're actually right. But java in itself is _nothing_ - it is the 
community around it that makes it good.

| 
| I don't believe that Fortran or C would would have been better off had IBM or 
| AT&T controlled the standardisation process the way Sun are doing with Java.

Those standards
  *) mainly concerns the language and not the whole needs of an 
application (some basic libs are also standardized, though)
  *) took "some years" to develop (C++ - is it standardized already, you 
say?!)
  *) are tiny, compared to Java SE, EE, ME.
  *) are dying. ;-)

.. and probably other things. (Can you compile linux using Intel's or MS's 
compiler?)

Basically, what I am implying, is that you'll kill Java if it's taken down 
a "true standardization" road (e.g. IEEE, Ecma or similar organizations), 
by those processes' slowness ("Internet Time" is at play here..), and 
you'll kill Java if it's open sourced, by fragmentation.
  .NET has Microsoft as backer, and Java has Sun - and I'm choosing the 
latter every day.

Regards,
Endre.

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

Chris Gray wrote:

Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
follow and adhere to. If this "standard" is defined rather more by one
company than the rest - what is the real problem?


The real problem is that if that company also markets an implementation of the 
standard, there will always be forces within the company which view all other 
implementations as competitors.


Yes, but... :)

It *is* one of the interesting things about the Java ecosystem - we are 
all able to all work together in creating the specifications via the JCP 
process, and then compete on implementation.


It seems to have worked pretty well so far.

geir

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

Endre Stølsvik wrote:


I personally wonder what _full_ open-sourcing of java actually would 
accomplish? How do you want Sun to do this? Slam a Apache-license on the 
code, and say "okay, folks, here it is - we're off"?


Well, sure.  That would be good.

  I believe that it could fragment into a million different, 
half-abandoned projects without any proper steering - who is to decide 
which new method to put into java.lang.String? How would compatibility 
between implementations be defined?


Those two questions are spec issues, and independent of whether or not 
there is an implementation of the spec under an open source license.


The spec will continue to evolve through the JCP process, and just like 
now, implementations will follow that spec and be tested by the 
associated TCK provided by the expert group if they are to be called 
"Java", regardless of the license of the implementation's source code.




Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to 
follow and adhere to. If this "standard" is defined rather more by one 
company than the rest - what is the real problem? As long as this one 
company still pours a bunch of money on the steering and progress of the 
project, isn't this better than one dozen open source projects that 
themselves would have to decide between them which new method, or worse, 
which new API, to include?


I'm not sure how to answer this.  I believe you are a little confused 
about how the JCP works and what we're doing here, and people are asking 
for.


First, we aren't advocating changes in the way Java SE specification is 
defined.  Rather, we are just creating an implementation of the same 
Java SE spec that Sun follows, but under the Apache License, and the Sun 
announcement is about their intention to distribute *their* 
implementation of the Java SE spec under an open source license.


Second, the Java SE specification - the 'standard' you refer to - is 
already defined by multiple companies and individuals that work on the 
Java SE specification Expert Group, of which Sun is the Spec Lead.




These questions should also be answered by the folks that continually 
scream about "OSS'ing Java": may we not risk that the whole java-thing 
falls apart at the seams if this actually happens? Who should, for 
example, run the JCP?


That's an orthogonal issue, independent of implementation of specifications.

OSS-ing Java SE is IMO just like OSS-ing Java EE (well, J2EE back then). 
 There was much consternation that the sky would fall in terms of 
splintering the J2EE standard,  but now 3-4 years later we've seen no 
such problems and a rather healthy Java EE ecosystem with both 
open-source (Geronimo, JBoss, JOnAS and Sun's Glassfish) and proprietary 
implementations (WebLogic, WebSphere, Sun's Whatever) of the spec 
peacefully coexisting.


In fact, it's clear to me that OSS in Java EE has had a very positive 
effect on both evolving the spec for users (i.e. the Spring and 
Hibernate influence on Java EE/EJB3) as well as making the technology 
available to end-users at a faster pace.




In my opinion, we, as in "the folks that aren't fully in MS's pockets", 
should be somewhat grateful for Sun's continual backing and support of 
java, while still try to hold them somewhat in check to not lock it in or 
away, but rather open it up for full, working, open source alternatives 
(Like with the Swing issue, where they apparently pretty much aren't 
allowing for a proper alternative, which should be fixed).


What's the "Swing issue"?



PS: How do you folks feel about Tiger's development model?


Do you mean Mustang via "Project Peabody"?  I like the community aspect 
- it was a great step forward for Sun - and could be improved by adding 
committers from other companies and making the code available under an 
open source license.




PPS: Why does Sun really bother to pour money into Java at all? The 
reason, I've come to understand, _was_ that they then could sell a bunch 
of their big-iron boxes to companies when the small intel-servers couldn't 
cope with a success of their developed java code. That argument is gone 
some years ago - so what's really in it for Sun, other than prestige?


To be frank, IMO it's leverage over a major control point in the 
software industry, which doesn't need to change if they OSS their 
implementation.


geir




-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Chris Gray]

> Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
> follow and adhere to. If this "standard" is defined rather more by one
> company than the rest - what is the real problem?

The real problem is that if that company also markets an implementation of the 
standard, there will always be forces within the company which view all other 
implementations as competitors.

I don't believe that Fortran or C would would have been better off had IBM or 
AT&T controlled the standardisation process the way Sun are doing with Java.

-- 
Chris Gray/k/ Embedded Java Solutions  BE0503765045
Embedded & Mobile Java, OSGihttp://www.k-embedded-java.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +32 3 216 0369


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

On 5/19/06, Endre Stølsvik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



PPS: Why does Sun really bother to pour money into Java at all? The
reason, I've come to understand, _was_ that they then could sell a bunch
of their big-iron boxes to companies when the small intel-servers couldn't
cope with a success of their developed java code. That argument is gone
some years ago - so what's really in it for Sun, other than prestige?

Regards,
Endre.



Replace "big-iron boxes" (which Sun still produces and can still sell) with
"lots of cheap AMD Opteron boxes running Opensolaris" AND, incresingly,
services.

According to Schwartz, Sun will nowadays sell software and services
(maintenance, bugfixes, etc) to corporations embracing the open java
platform.  I think he's right. I don't know, however, if that business model
will generate enough revenue to maintain the current Sun infrastructure. I
hope so, and I wish they promoted the commercial StarOffice code more. But
hey, WTF do I know. :)

See:
Sun CEO defends value of Java
http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6073463.html

In other words, Red Hat proves that you can sell subscription services,
maintenance, support and consulting/integration and still make a profit on
top of the "free" linux world. Sun wants to do the same on top of
OpenSolaris and/or Java (not necessarily together).

FC
PS: They could also win a lot by selling the java brand and logo placement,
to cellphone manufacturers, for instance.

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Endre Stølsvik]

On Tue, 16 May 2006, Fernando Cassia wrote:

| I give Sun credit for two things...
| 
| 1. preventing polluting of the platform a la J++.
| 
| "In a June 20, 1996, memo entitled "windows & internet issues" Microsoft's
| then-VP Paul Maritz
| 
explainedthat
| it was necessary for the firm to "fundamentally blunt Java/AWT
| momentum" in order to "protect our core asset Windows ? the thing we get
| paid $s for".
| 
| 2. Continuing pouring $$$ into its development, despite the screams from the
| financial gurus telling McNealy and co that it was not "generating money"
| for the company.

Hear, hear!

| 
| ...but their software strategy and their contributions to the open source
| camp over the years is something worth praising, not ridiculing...

... and hear!

I personally wonder what _full_ open-sourcing of java actually would 
accomplish? How do you want Sun to do this? Slam a Apache-license on the 
code, and say "okay, folks, here it is - we're off"?
  I believe that it could fragment into a million different, 
half-abandoned projects without any proper steering - who is to decide 
which new method to put into java.lang.String? How would compatibility 
between implementations be defined?

Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to 
follow and adhere to. If this "standard" is defined rather more by one 
company than the rest - what is the real problem? As long as this one 
company still pours a bunch of money on the steering and progress of the 
project, isn't this better than one dozen open source projects that 
themselves would have to decide between them which new method, or worse, 
which new API, to include?

These questions should also be answered by the folks that continually 
scream about "OSS'ing Java": may we not risk that the whole java-thing 
falls apart at the seams if this actually happens? Who should, for 
example, run the JCP?

In my opinion, we, as in "the folks that aren't fully in MS's pockets", 
should be somewhat grateful for Sun's continual backing and support of 
java, while still try to hold them somewhat in check to not lock it in or 
away, but rather open it up for full, working, open source alternatives 
(Like with the Swing issue, where they apparently pretty much aren't 
allowing for a proper alternative, which should be fixed).

PS: How do you folks feel about Tiger's development model?

PPS: Why does Sun really bother to pour money into Java at all? The 
reason, I've come to understand, _was_ that they then could sell a bunch 
of their big-iron boxes to companies when the small intel-servers couldn't 
cope with a success of their developed java code. That argument is gone 
some years ago - so what's really in it for Sun, other than prestige?

Regards,
Endre.

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Danese Cooper]

Thought you guys might be interested in this...

http://danesecooper.blogs.com/divablog/2006/05/what_sun_doesnt.html

Danese

On May 18, 2006, at 12:31 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:


But that's not open source...

Fernando Cassia wrote:

On 5/17/06, Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



But as I mentioned before, this is still irrelevant as far as  
open-java

efforts because the JRE/JDK source code is not available
Well, this is not entirely accurate. The source of Mustang has  
been open for

months, for others to take a peek into and fix bugs.
http://download.java.net/jdk6/
The problem is, any changes you make must be submitted back to Sun  
and it´s
up to them if the changes-fixes are incorporated or not, at least  
as far as

I understand it.
and cannot be

modified and redistributed, even if it passes the TCK tests.

This is true, hopefully this will change soon - I hope-.
FC


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

On 5/18/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


But that's not open source...



Obviously not. :)

FC

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

But that's not open source...

Fernando Cassia wrote:

On 5/17/06, Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



But as I mentioned before, this is still irrelevant as far as open-java
efforts because the JRE/JDK source code is not available



Well, this is not entirely accurate. The source of Mustang has been open 
for

months, for others to take a peek into and fix bugs.

http://download.java.net/jdk6/

The problem is, any changes you make must be submitted back to Sun and it´s
up to them if the changes-fixes are incorporated or not, at least as far as
I understand it.

and cannot be

modified and redistributed, even if it passes the TCK tests.



This is true, hopefully this will change soon - I hope-.

FC



-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

On 5/17/06, Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



But as I mentioned before, this is still irrelevant as far as open-java
efforts because the JRE/JDK source code is not available



Well, this is not entirely accurate. The source of Mustang has been open for
months, for others to take a peek into and fix bugs.

http://download.java.net/jdk6/

The problem is, any changes you make must be submitted back to Sun and it´s
up to them if the changes-fixes are incorporated or not, at least as far as
I understand it.

and cannot be

modified and redistributed, even if it passes the TCK tests.



This is true, hopefully this will change soon - I hope-.

FC

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

Leo Simons wrote:

On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:46:55AM -0700, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:

So, while many of us knew that Sun will OSS Java eventually, it's still 
good news, and it's nice to see that the Java ecosystem is moving slowly 
but surely to openness :)


Good on them! You know, 2 years ago I would've pretty much jumped up and
down a little and I'd have gone "whoohooh!".

But, looking at how harmony is doing and where its going, and also at how
classpath&friends are doing and where they're going, the statement that
the question to ask is not an "if" is just old news for me. *We* know that
already and I think we've been doing real well to get the "how" figured out,
leaving only "when" as The Big Question.

Here's hoping that this Rich Green fellow comes and asks us the "how"
question, though I hope he's been listening closely already :-)


He's a smart guy.  I suspect that he already knows what he's going to do.



In the meantime, lets keep up doing a great job!



I want to add one thing.  There *is* something subtly significant here - 
Sun is now committed to do this.  We all knew they had to OSS Java at 
some point, but Sun still had to recognize this and make this first 
official step.


Jonathan Schwartz has said this before, but not as the CEO, and that is 
what makes this a major step, to me anyway.


geir



-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Leo Simons]

On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:46:55AM -0700, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> First, they announced some kind of distribution-like agreement with 
> Ubuntu, so that any Debian-based distro can easily install Java.

About time! Goodness!

> Second I'm not sure how to describe this.  When Jonathan Schwartz 
> (the CEO of Sun) asked Rich Green (the new EVP of software) if he was 
> going to open-source Java, the answer was "the question isn't if, but 
> how..." (or something like that)
> 
> I suppose that means they have made some sort of decision to do it, but 
> have no idea how or when.

Still, progress is progress :-)

> So, while many of us knew that Sun will OSS Java eventually, it's still 
> good news, and it's nice to see that the Java ecosystem is moving slowly 
> but surely to openness :)

Good on them! You know, 2 years ago I would've pretty much jumped up and
down a little and I'd have gone "whoohooh!".

But, looking at how harmony is doing and where its going, and also at how
classpath&friends are doing and where they're going, the statement that
the question to ask is not an "if" is just old news for me. *We* know that
already and I think we've been doing real well to get the "how" figured out,
leaving only "when" as The Big Question.

Here's hoping that this Rich Green fellow comes and asks us the "how"
question, though I hope he's been listening closely already :-)

In the meantime, lets keep up doing a great job!

LSD

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

Fernando Cassia wrote:

On 5/17/06, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



 The JPackage folks have an interesting

discussion, and I expect that the discussion (flaming?) on Debian's
mailing lists will begin once the list server is back up.

Waste of time...

If licenses are irrelevant, the Harmony project is a waste of time as
well.


Sorry, I meant it's a waste of time to devote time -at least for me- to
mailing list discussions and flame wars trying to discuss "interpretations
of the license". It's better and more productive to send all feedback
directly to Sun, instead of trying to guess what something might or might
not mean in the legal text.


Discussion on Debian shipping sun-java5 does not belong here.

GNU/Linux distros shipping a certified java virtual machine is a good
thing for the java ecosystem also because it will make the entire java
package management ecosystem do a quantum leap forward.

But as I mentioned before, this is still irrelevant as far as open-java
efforts because the JRE/JDK source code is not available and cannot be
modified and redistributed, even if it passes the TCK tests.

Sun's new CEO has announced that the question is not 'when' but 'how'
Sun will license their code under an OSI-compatible license.

Well, we have a "how" to propose (donate the code to the ASF and let
Harmony take care of that) what I want to hear in public is why that
doesn't work for Sun.


Because I don't believe that "how" is a question they don't have the 
start of an answer for.


I don't believe that Rich Green never thought about this before being 
asked by Jonathan on stage, and really was hoping for input from us.  I 
expect they know exactly what we'd suggest.


That said, the door is always open - we'd be happy to consider a 
contribution from Sun :)


geir




-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On 5/17/06, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >  The JPackage folks have an interesting
>> >> discussion, and I expect that the discussion (flaming?) on Debian's
>> >> mailing lists will begin once the list server is back up.
>> >>
>> >> Waste of time...
>>
>> If licenses are irrelevant, the Harmony project is a waste of time as
>> well.
> 
> 
> Sorry, I meant it's a waste of time to devote time -at least for me- to
> mailing list discussions and flame wars trying to discuss "interpretations
> of the license". It's better and more productive to send all feedback
> directly to Sun, instead of trying to guess what something might or might
> not mean in the legal text.

Discussion on Debian shipping sun-java5 does not belong here.

GNU/Linux distros shipping a certified java virtual machine is a good
thing for the java ecosystem also because it will make the entire java
package management ecosystem do a quantum leap forward.

But as I mentioned before, this is still irrelevant as far as open-java
efforts because the JRE/JDK source code is not available and cannot be
modified and redistributed, even if it passes the TCK tests.

Sun's new CEO has announced that the question is not 'when' but 'how'
Sun will license their code under an OSI-compatible license.

Well, we have a "how" to propose (donate the code to the ASF and let
Harmony take care of that) what I want to hear in public is why that
doesn't work for Sun.

-- 
Stefano.


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

On 5/17/06, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



>  The JPackage folks have an interesting
>> discussion, and I expect that the discussion (flaming?) on Debian's
>> mailing lists will begin once the list server is back up.
>>
>> Waste of time...

If licenses are irrelevant, the Harmony project is a waste of time as
well.



Sorry, I meant it's a waste of time to devote time -at least for me- to
mailing list discussions and flame wars trying to discuss "interpretations
of the license". It's better and more productive to send all feedback
directly to Sun, instead of trying to guess what something might or might
not mean in the legal text.

FC

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Florian Weimer]

* Fernando Cassia:

> On 5/17/06, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> It's still a very strange license with a lot of oddities.  For
>> example, it does not allow end users to use Debian's versions for
>> cross-platform development.
>
>
> Do you -or anyone else besides lawyers on crack living in their private
> little bubble- really think anyone out there REALLY gives a  * about the
> wording of the end-user license??.  Most end-users I know click "ok" or
> press [enter] faster than an eye can blink.

I used "end users" in the Debian sense, which also includes developers
(and not just Debian maintainers or mirror operators).  Developers do
care about licenses, I hope.

> Plus, If I create java bytecode with it and distribute it, what proof is
> there -in the bytecode- about if I used version "x" or "y" ???

If the byte code was, at the time of the alleged creation, only
generated by Sun's compiler (and none of the alternatives), this might
be sufficient to shift the burden of proof.

>  The JPackage folks have an interesting
>> discussion, and I expect that the discussion (flaming?) on Debian's
>> mailing lists will begin once the list server is back up.
>>
>> Waste of time...

If licenses are irrelevant, the Harmony project is a waste of time as
well.

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

On 5/17/06, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



It's still a very strange license with a lot of oddities.  For
example, it does not allow end users to use Debian's versions for
cross-platform development.



Do you -or anyone else besides lawyers on crack living in their private
little bubble- really think anyone out there REALLY gives a  * about the
wording of the end-user license??.  Most end-users I know click "ok" or
press [enter] faster than an eye can blink.

Plus, If I create java bytecode with it and distribute it, what proof is
there -in the bytecode- about if I used version "x" or "y" ???

 The JPackage folks have an interesting

discussion, and I expect that the discussion (flaming?) on Debian's
mailing lists will begin once the list server is back up.

Waste of time...


FC

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Florian Weimer]

* Geir Magnusson, Jr.:

> First, they announced some kind of distribution-like agreement with
> Ubuntu, so that any Debian-based distro can easily install Java.  It
> wasn't clear if they really are going to distribute Ubuntu w/ Java or
> just make it easy to install via apt.

Currently, it seems that Java is available from debian.org servers.  I
don't know about Ubuntu.

(Note that Sun's Debian installation instructions are wrong: You still
have to fiddle with /etc/apt/sources.list after the installation.
This is no surprise because the installer does not include non-free by
default.)

> I guess it's a new license for their binaries.  This is good news -
> one of the motivations of Harmony was to help make Java a
> first-class citizen on Linux, and this is a solid step in that
> direction.

It's still a very strange license with a lot of oddities.  For
example, it does not allow end users to use Debian's versions for
cross-platform development.  The JPackage folks have an interesting
discussion, and I expect that the discussion (flaming?) on Debian's
mailing lists will begin once the list server is back up.

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen]

Fernando Cassia skrev  den 17-05-2006 14:35:


but VisualAge is still alive - it has just been

rewritten from Scheme to Java and been renamed to Eclipse (or Rational
Application Developer).  You may have heard of it :)



While I like Netbeans, I know about Eclipse and I heard about the
contributions to it based on VA. However, I don't think I can start 
pasting

VisualAge for Basic code into Eclipse and create win32, OS/2, or AIX
binaries from it like it was possible with VA for Basic, or can I?
Sorry, I was talking about VisualAge for Java.  Apparently the other 
branches have been put to rest :)


The Rational Application Developer for iSeries (which is Eclipse with 
extra stuff) surprised me by requireing a meager 4 Gb on my harddrive, 
but astonished me when it needed to download 1 Gb of updates...  So, 
Geir, the "holy bloat" could be a _LOT_ worse :)


--
 Thorbjørn







smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

On 5/17/06, Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Fernando Cassia skrev  den 16-05-2006 23:07:

I generally agree with you that IBM have a hard time selling gold at
half the price,



Not only that, they dig a hole and put gold into a hole, then denying the
gold ever existed.
Then they start sellling cheap tin (WinXP based solutions) instead... ;-)

but VisualAge is still alive - it has just been

rewritten from Scheme to Java and been renamed to Eclipse (or Rational
Application Developer).  You may have heard of it :)



While I like Netbeans, I know about Eclipse and I heard about the
contributions to it based on VA. However, I don't think I can start pasting
VisualAge for Basic code into Eclipse and create win32, OS/2, or AIX
binaries from it like it was possible with VA for Basic, or can I?

FC


--

  Thorbjørn (being picky today :)







--
"When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. That's my
religion."
- Abraham Lincoln.

"I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider
ethics to be an important but exclusively human concern, without any
supernatural authority behind it."
- Albert Einstein.

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen]

Fernando Cassia skrev  den 16-05-2006 23:07:


Had it been an IBM project, it would be as alive today as OpenDoc, IBM
Voicetype, OS/2, Lotus Smartsuite, VisualAge for Java, VisualAge for 
Basic,


I generally agree with you that IBM have a hard time selling gold at 
half the price, but VisualAge is still alive - it has just been 
rewritten from Scheme to Java and been renamed to Eclipse (or Rational 
Application Developer).  You may have heard of it :)



--
 Thorbjørn (being picky today :)



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Dalibor Topic wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:46:55AM -0700, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> I was at the J1 keynote this morning hoping to hear news about Sun 
>> open-sourcing Java.
>>
>> First, they announced some kind of distribution-like agreement with 
>> Ubuntu, so that any Debian-based distro can easily install Java.  It 
>> wasn't clear if they really are going to distribute Ubuntu w/ Java or 
>> just make it easy to install via apt.  I guess it's a new license for 
> 
> Since I am not at JavaOne, and thus out of reach of catapulted T-shirts,
> here is the gist of it:
> 
> SPOILER ALERT
> This post contains sarcasm and pokes mild fun at Sun. You can still hit 
> 'd', if you can't stand someone making fun of Sun's antics.
> SPOILER ALERT
> 
> Basicially, Sun decided to fix the more wacky parts of the binary 
> license that made it impossible for distributions to ship the JDK
> without having to ram down Sun's proprietary software down the throats of
> their users, and leave them no choice of a free software alternative. 
> 
> After ~5 years of Debian pointing out the obvious issues[1] of that 
> one, Sun eventually figured out that it may not be such a great idea, 
> after all. That blazingly fast display of the ability to listen follows 
> Schwartz's so accurately titled blog entry "Java, and Survival of the Most
> Adaptable". E pur si muove! :)
> 
>> their binaries.  This is good news - one of the motivations of Harmony 
>> was to help make Java a first-class citizen on Linux, and this is a 
>> solid step in that direction.
> 
> Sorta. Kinda. It's basically the first step Sun made to get off their
> appreciation for applying Microsoft's Windows OEM licensing concepts to 
> the redistributors of the JDK/JRE binaries. They could have done a lot
> better than with the license they ended up with. They could have also
> done worse, I guess, given Sun's legal divisions' masterworks like the 
> "Read Only" license.
> 
> It's a huge step for Sun, no wonder it took 5 years to remove a handful 
> of clauses from the BCL. :)
> 
>> Second I'm not sure how to describe this.  When Jonathan Schwartz 
>> (the CEO of Sun) asked Rich Green (the new EVP of software) if he was 
>> going to open-source Java, the answer was "the question isn't if, but 
>> how..." (or something like that)
>>
>> I suppose that means they have made some sort of decision to do it, but 
>> have no idea how or when.
> 
> Well, if you've seen Jonathan Schwartz pompously 'open source Java3D' a 
> few years ago, and then seen that after the hype cleared up, it meant 
> that Sun was keeping Java3D proprietary, and just releasing a bunch of
> coding examples under a anti-nuclear BSD license, you know what to
> expect: more of the same.
> 
> My guess from Sun's past performance pseudo-open-sourcing Java3D, JAI, 
> etc. is that Schwartz will 'open source Java' in 2010, with huge fanfares, 
> and when one looks at the small print, that will actually mean that 
> you'll be able to get the examples from the Swing trail, and nothing 
> else, under the anti-nuclear BSD license. :)
> 
>> So, while many of us knew that Sun will OSS Java eventually, it's still 
>> good news, and it's nice to see that the Java ecosystem is moving slowly 
>> but surely to openness :)
> 
> For a suitable definition of 'openness', which Sun has not figured out
> yet ... so no new license announcement just yet. :)
> 
> Nevertheless, I propose the name Java 'Openness' License for the upcoming
> wonderlicense at JAvaOne 2010. :)

Here are the facts:

http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/non-free/s/sun-java5/sun-java5_1.5.0-06-1/copyright

This is a great step in the widespread use of java in the linux world
(apt-get install geronimo, anyone?) but it is no step in the direction
of open sourcing java.

the article at

 http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3048

(Simon, you still around here?) claims that this license is equivalent to

 https://java3d.dev.java.net/jdl-java3d.pdf

and that the debian package is called "sun-java-jre" but claims are
bogus. The package is called "sun-java5" and it is available in the
'unstable' debian flavor.

But I agree with Dalibor, "eppur si muove" ;-)

-- 
Stefano.


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Fernando Cassia]

I give Sun credit for two things...

1. preventing polluting of the platform a la J++.

"In a June 20, 1996, memo entitled "windows & internet issues" Microsoft's
then-VP Paul Maritz
explainedthat
it was necessary for the firm to "fundamentally blunt Java/AWT
momentum" in order to "protect our core asset Windows – the thing we get
paid $s for".

2. Continuing pouring $$$ into its development, despite the screams from the
financial gurus telling McNealy and co that it was not "generating money"
for the company.

Had it been an IBM project, it would be as alive today as OpenDoc, IBM
Voicetype, OS/2, Lotus Smartsuite, VisualAge for Java, VisualAge for Basic,
"Person to Person" (video converence package), VisualAge for C++, Hotmedia
(java based streaming), IBM Netcomber, Web Traffic Express (proxy-cache)
 the list of abandoned IBM software by clueless IBM managers goes on
forever

So every time I read about some clueless IBM manager rolling and screaming
like a stabbed pig because "Sun still controls OpenOffice" or "Sun should
opensource java" I grin and think no line of code deserves to be sent to
IBM's clueless managers' way...

...I guess "kicking Sun" is becoming some sort of national sport -- not that
they don't have anything to be criticized about
http://geekgaucho.blogspot.com/2006/05/uglification-of-sun-workstation-cases.html

...but their software strategy and their contributions to the open source
camp over the years is something worth praising, not ridiculing...

Graham Hamilton, Sun VP said in his blog: "The licensing rules for
J2SE 5.0were carefully designed to allow independent, compatible
open-source
implementations of the J2SE specification".

FC

On 5/16/06, Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:46:55AM -0700, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> I was at the J1 keynote this morning hoping to hear news about Sun
> open-sourcing Java.
>

Re: So today Sun announced...

[Dalibor Topic]

On Tue, May 16, 2006 at 10:46:55AM -0700, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> I was at the J1 keynote this morning hoping to hear news about Sun 
> open-sourcing Java.
> 
> First, they announced some kind of distribution-like agreement with 
> Ubuntu, so that any Debian-based distro can easily install Java.  It 
> wasn't clear if they really are going to distribute Ubuntu w/ Java or 
> just make it easy to install via apt.  I guess it's a new license for 

Since I am not at JavaOne, and thus out of reach of catapulted T-shirts,
here is the gist of it:

SPOILER ALERT
This post contains sarcasm and pokes mild fun at Sun. You can still hit 
'd', if you can't stand someone making fun of Sun's antics.
SPOILER ALERT

Basicially, Sun decided to fix the more wacky parts of the binary 
license that made it impossible for distributions to ship the JDK
without having to ram down Sun's proprietary software down the throats of
their users, and leave them no choice of a free software alternative. 

After ~5 years of Debian pointing out the obvious issues[1] of that 
one, Sun eventually figured out that it may not be such a great idea, 
after all. That blazingly fast display of the ability to listen follows 
Schwartz's so accurately titled blog entry "Java, and Survival of the Most
Adaptable". E pur si muove! :)

> their binaries.  This is good news - one of the motivations of Harmony 
> was to help make Java a first-class citizen on Linux, and this is a 
> solid step in that direction.

Sorta. Kinda. It's basically the first step Sun made to get off their
appreciation for applying Microsoft's Windows OEM licensing concepts to 
the redistributors of the JDK/JRE binaries. They could have done a lot
better than with the license they ended up with. They could have also
done worse, I guess, given Sun's legal divisions' masterworks like the 
"Read Only" license.

It's a huge step for Sun, no wonder it took 5 years to remove a handful 
of clauses from the BCL. :)

> Second I'm not sure how to describe this.  When Jonathan Schwartz 
> (the CEO of Sun) asked Rich Green (the new EVP of software) if he was 
> going to open-source Java, the answer was "the question isn't if, but 
> how..." (or something like that)
> 
> I suppose that means they have made some sort of decision to do it, but 
> have no idea how or when.

Well, if you've seen Jonathan Schwartz pompously 'open source Java3D' a 
few years ago, and then seen that after the hype cleared up, it meant 
that Sun was keeping Java3D proprietary, and just releasing a bunch of
coding examples under a anti-nuclear BSD license, you know what to
expect: more of the same.

My guess from Sun's past performance pseudo-open-sourcing Java3D, JAI, 
etc. is that Schwartz will 'open source Java' in 2010, with huge fanfares, 
and when one looks at the small print, that will actually mean that 
you'll be able to get the examples from the Swing trail, and nothing 
else, under the anti-nuclear BSD license. :)

> So, while many of us knew that Sun will OSS Java eventually, it's still 
> good news, and it's nice to see that the Java ecosystem is moving slowly 
> but surely to openness :)

For a suitable definition of 'openness', which Sun has not figured out
yet ... so no new license announcement just yet. :)

Nevertheless, I propose the name Java 'Openness' License for the upcoming
wonderlicense at JAvaOne 2010. :)

cheers,
dalibor topic

[1]
http://groups.google.de/group/linux.debian.legal/browse_thread/thread/41c95fc0e542c5c5/cfcff8fd3e4b4d63?lnk=st&q=jdk+debian-legal&rnum=35&hl=de#cfcff8fd3e4b4d63

> geir
> 
> 
> -
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

So today Sun announced...

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

I was at the J1 keynote this morning hoping to hear news about Sun 
open-sourcing Java.


First, they announced some kind of distribution-like agreement with 
Ubuntu, so that any Debian-based distro can easily install Java.  It 
wasn't clear if they really are going to distribute Ubuntu w/ Java or 
just make it easy to install via apt.  I guess it's a new license for 
their binaries.  This is good news - one of the motivations of Harmony 
was to help make Java a first-class citizen on Linux, and this is a 
solid step in that direction.


Second I'm not sure how to describe this.  When Jonathan Schwartz 
(the CEO of Sun) asked Rich Green (the new EVP of software) if he was 
going to open-source Java, the answer was "the question isn't if, but 
how..." (or something like that)


I suppose that means they have made some sort of decision to do it, but 
have no idea how or when.


So, while many of us knew that Sun will OSS Java eventually, it's still 
good news, and it's nice to see that the Java ecosystem is moving slowly 
but surely to openness :)


geir


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]