Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Monday, February 13, 2017, Brice Dutheil  wrote:

> The Android battle is another thing that I wouldn't consider for OracleJDK
> / OpenJDK.
> While I do like what Google did from a technical point of view, Google may
> have overstepped fair use (or not – I don't know). Anyway Sun didn't like
> what Google did, they probably considered going to court at that time.
>
>
>
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:20 AM, kurt greaves  > wrote:
>
>> are people actually trying to imply that Google is less evil than oracle?
>> what is this shill fest
>>
>>
>> On 12 Feb. 2017 8:24 am, "Kant Kodali" > > wrote:
>>
>> Saw this one today...
>>
>> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13624062
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Eric Evans > > wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Edward Capriolo >> > wrote:
>>> > Lets be clear:
>>> > What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
>>> >
>>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
>>> >
>>> > Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
>>> use.
>>> >
>>> > https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
>>> >
>>> > As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
>>> > Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
>>> > better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
>>> > meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
>>> >
>>> > * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was
>>> Acunu.
>>> > They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache
>>> Cassandra.
>>> > http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-ra
>>> ises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/.
>>> > That product no longer exists.
>>> >
>>> > "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>>> > JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
>>> >
>>> > What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a
>>> "free
>>> > software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
>>> > popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
>>> > including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech
>>> companies in
>>> > the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
>>> Specifically
>>> > I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be viable.
>>> >
>>> > There are two specific reasons.
>>> > 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
>>> > 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new
>>> features
>>> > that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening
>>> in a
>>> > sane way.
>>> >
>>> > I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++
>>> 11,
>>> > 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux
>>> GCC to
>>> > microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java
>>> only
>>> > wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and
>>> binary
>>> > code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
>>> language
>>> > would suffer.
>>>
>>> I realize that you're trying to be pragmatic about all of this, but
>>> what I don't think you realize, is that so am I.
>>>
>>> Java could change hands at any time (it has once already), or Oracle
>>> leadership could decide to go in a different direction.  Imagine for
>>> example that they relicensed it to exclude use by orientation or
>>> religion, Cassandra would implicitly carry these restrictions as well.
>>> Imagine that they decided to provide a back-door to the NSA, Cassandra
>>> would then also contain such a back-door.  These might sound
>>> hypothetical, but there is plenty of precedent here.
>>>
>>> OpenJDK benefits from the same resources and leadership from Oracle
>>> that you value, but is licensed and distributed in a way that
>>> safeguards us from a day when Oracle becomes less benevolent, (if that
>>> were to happen, some other giant company could assume the mantle of
>>> leadership).
>>>
>>> All I'm really suggesting is that we at least soften our requirement
>>> on the Oracle JVM, and perhaps perform some test runs in CI against
>>> OpenJDK.  Actively discouraging people from using the Free Software
>>> alternative here, one that is working well for many, isn't the
>>> behavior I'd normally expect from a Free Software project.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Eric Evans
>>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Brice Dutheil]

The Android battle is another thing that I wouldn't consider for OracleJDK
/ OpenJDK.
While I do like what Google did from a technical point of view, Google may
have overstepped fair use (or not – I don't know). Anyway Sun didn't like
what Google did, they probably considered going to court at that time.




-- Brice

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:20 AM, kurt greaves  wrote:

> are people actually trying to imply that Google is less evil than oracle?
> what is this shill fest
>
>
> On 12 Feb. 2017 8:24 am, "Kant Kodali"  wrote:
>
> Saw this one today...
>
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13624062
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Eric Evans 
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>> wrote:
>> > Lets be clear:
>> > What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
>> >
>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
>> >
>> > Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
>> use.
>> >
>> > https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
>> >
>> > As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
>> > Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
>> > better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
>> > meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
>> >
>> > * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was
>> Acunu.
>> > They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache
>> Cassandra.
>> > http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-ra
>> ises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/.
>> > That product no longer exists.
>> >
>> > "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>> > JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
>> >
>> > What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a
>> "free
>> > software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
>> > popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
>> > including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech
>> companies in
>> > the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
>> Specifically
>> > I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be viable.
>> >
>> > There are two specific reasons.
>> > 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
>> > 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
>> > that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in
>> a
>> > sane way.
>> >
>> > I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++
>> 11,
>> > 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC
>> to
>> > microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java
>> only
>> > wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and binary
>> > code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
>> language
>> > would suffer.
>>
>> I realize that you're trying to be pragmatic about all of this, but
>> what I don't think you realize, is that so am I.
>>
>> Java could change hands at any time (it has once already), or Oracle
>> leadership could decide to go in a different direction.  Imagine for
>> example that they relicensed it to exclude use by orientation or
>> religion, Cassandra would implicitly carry these restrictions as well.
>> Imagine that they decided to provide a back-door to the NSA, Cassandra
>> would then also contain such a back-door.  These might sound
>> hypothetical, but there is plenty of precedent here.
>>
>> OpenJDK benefits from the same resources and leadership from Oracle
>> that you value, but is licensed and distributed in a way that
>> safeguards us from a day when Oracle becomes less benevolent, (if that
>> were to happen, some other giant company could assume the mantle of
>> leadership).
>>
>> All I'm really suggesting is that we at least soften our requirement
>> on the Oracle JVM, and perhaps perform some test runs in CI against
>> OpenJDK.  Actively discouraging people from using the Free Software
>> alternative here, one that is working well for many, isn't the
>> behavior I'd normally expect from a Free Software project.
>>
>> --
>> Eric Evans
>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>>
>
>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[kurt greaves]

are people actually trying to imply that Google is less evil than oracle?
what is this shill fest

On 12 Feb. 2017 8:24 am, "Kant Kodali"  wrote:

Saw this one today...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13624062

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Eric Evans 
wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
> > Lets be clear:
> > What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
> >
> > Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
> use.
> >
> > https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
> >
> > As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
> > Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
> > better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
> > meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
> >
> > * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was Acunu.
> > They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache
> Cassandra.
> > http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-ra
> ises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/.
> > That product no longer exists.
> >
> > "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
> > JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
> >
> > What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a "free
> > software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
> > popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
> > including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech
> companies in
> > the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
> Specifically
> > I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be viable.
> >
> > There are two specific reasons.
> > 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
> > 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
> > that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in a
> > sane way.
> >
> > I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++
> 11,
> > 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC
> to
> > microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java
> only
> > wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and binary
> > code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
> language
> > would suffer.
>
> I realize that you're trying to be pragmatic about all of this, but
> what I don't think you realize, is that so am I.
>
> Java could change hands at any time (it has once already), or Oracle
> leadership could decide to go in a different direction.  Imagine for
> example that they relicensed it to exclude use by orientation or
> religion, Cassandra would implicitly carry these restrictions as well.
> Imagine that they decided to provide a back-door to the NSA, Cassandra
> would then also contain such a back-door.  These might sound
> hypothetical, but there is plenty of precedent here.
>
> OpenJDK benefits from the same resources and leadership from Oracle
> that you value, but is licensed and distributed in a way that
> safeguards us from a day when Oracle becomes less benevolent, (if that
> were to happen, some other giant company could assume the mantle of
> leadership).
>
> All I'm really suggesting is that we at least soften our requirement
> on the Oracle JVM, and perhaps perform some test runs in CI against
> OpenJDK.  Actively discouraging people from using the Free Software
> alternative here, one that is working well for many, isn't the
> behavior I'd normally expect from a Free Software project.
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

Saw this one today...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13624062

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Eric Evans 
wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
> > Lets be clear:
> > What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
> >
> > Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
> use.
> >
> > https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
> >
> > As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
> > Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
> > better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
> > meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
> >
> > * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was Acunu.
> > They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache
> Cassandra.
> > http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-
> raises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/.
> > That product no longer exists.
> >
> > "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
> > JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
> >
> > What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a "free
> > software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
> > popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
> > including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech
> companies in
> > the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
> Specifically
> > I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be viable.
> >
> > There are two specific reasons.
> > 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
> > 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
> > that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in a
> > sane way.
> >
> > I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++
> 11,
> > 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC
> to
> > microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java
> only
> > wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and binary
> > code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
> language
> > would suffer.
>
> I realize that you're trying to be pragmatic about all of this, but
> what I don't think you realize, is that so am I.
>
> Java could change hands at any time (it has once already), or Oracle
> leadership could decide to go in a different direction.  Imagine for
> example that they relicensed it to exclude use by orientation or
> religion, Cassandra would implicitly carry these restrictions as well.
> Imagine that they decided to provide a back-door to the NSA, Cassandra
> would then also contain such a back-door.  These might sound
> hypothetical, but there is plenty of precedent here.
>
> OpenJDK benefits from the same resources and leadership from Oracle
> that you value, but is licensed and distributed in a way that
> safeguards us from a day when Oracle becomes less benevolent, (if that
> were to happen, some other giant company could assume the mantle of
> leadership).
>
> All I'm really suggesting is that we at least soften our requirement
> on the Oracle JVM, and perhaps perform some test runs in CI against
> OpenJDK.  Actively discouraging people from using the Free Software
> alternative here, one that is working well for many, isn't the
> behavior I'd normally expect from a Free Software project.
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Eric Evans]

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Edward Capriolo  wrote:
> Lets be clear:
> What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
>
> Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to use.
>
> https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
>
> As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
> Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
> better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
> meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
>
> * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was Acunu.
> They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache Cassandra.
> http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-raises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/.
> That product no longer exists.
>
> "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
>
> What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a "free
> software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
> popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
> including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech companies in
> the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable. Specifically
> I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be viable.
>
> There are two specific reasons.
> 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
> 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
> that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in a
> sane way.
>
> I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++ 11,
> 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC to
> microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java only
> wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and binary
> code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the language
> would suffer.

I realize that you're trying to be pragmatic about all of this, but
what I don't think you realize, is that so am I.

Java could change hands at any time (it has once already), or Oracle
leadership could decide to go in a different direction.  Imagine for
example that they relicensed it to exclude use by orientation or
religion, Cassandra would implicitly carry these restrictions as well.
Imagine that they decided to provide a back-door to the NSA, Cassandra
would then also contain such a back-door.  These might sound
hypothetical, but there is plenty of precedent here.

OpenJDK benefits from the same resources and leadership from Oracle
that you value, but is licensed and distributed in a way that
safeguards us from a day when Oracle becomes less benevolent, (if that
were to happen, some other giant company could assume the mantle of
leadership).

All I'm really suggesting is that we at least soften our requirement
on the Oracle JVM, and perhaps perform some test runs in CI against
OpenJDK.  Actively discouraging people from using the Free Software
alternative here, one that is working well for many, isn't the
behavior I'd normally expect from a Free Software project.

-- 
Eric Evans
john.eric.ev...@gmail.com

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kai Wang]

Back in the day, HotSpot was recommended because OpenJDK had some stability
and performance issues. But in 2015 or maybe 2014 I heard in a presentation
(don't remember by whom) that OpenJDK is pretty on par with HotSpot for C*.

But I guess the documentation was never properly updated.

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> The fact that Oracle would even come up with something like this "Oracle's
> position was that Google should have to license code from them." is just
> messed up. And these kind of business practices are exactly the reason why
> to stay away. Of course every company is there to make money. You look at
> Google or FB and see how much open source contribution they have
> done. Oracle doesnt come anywhere close to that.
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> This is a subjective question and of course it would turn into
>>> opinionated answers and I think we should welcome that (Nothing wrong in
>>> debating a topic). we have many such debates as SE's such as programming
>>> language comparisons, Architectural debates, Framework/Library debates and
>>> so on. people who don't like this conversation can simply refrain from
>>> following this thread right. I don't know why they choose to Jump in if
>>> they dont like a topic
>>>
>>> Sun is a great company no doubt! I don't know if Oracle is. Things like
>>> this https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/220136-google-plans-
>>> to-remove-oracles-java-apis-from-android-n is what pisses me about
>>> Oracle which gives an impression that they are not up for open source. It
>>> would be awesome to see JVM running on more and more devices (not less) so
>>> Google taking away Oracle Java API's from Android is a big failure from
>>> Oracle.
>>>
>>> JVM is a great piece of Software and by far there isn't anything yet
>>> that comes close. And there are great people who worked at SUN at that time.
>>> open the JDK source code and read it. you will encounter some great
>>> ideas and Algorithms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Benjamin Roth 
 wrote:

> Does this discussion really make sense any more? To me it seems it
> turned opinionated and religious. From my point of view anything that has
> to be said was said.
>
> Am 02.01.2017 21:27 schrieb "Edward Capriolo" :
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans <
>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo <
>>> edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra
>>> is a
>>> > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>>> > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>>> > implicit dependency)."
>>> >
>>> > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The
>>> oracle JVM
>>> > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
>>> company.
>>>
>>> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
>>> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
>>> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
>>> licensing).
>>>
>>> Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
>>> Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute
>>> it.
>>>
>>> The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
>>> the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
>>> you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
>>> software).
>>>
>>> > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a
>>> driver
>>> > hosted on github but made my a company.
>>>
>>> It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
>>> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.
>>>
>>> > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
>>> dedicated
>>> > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since
>>> taking over
>>> > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
>>> maintained
>>> > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.
>>>
>>> I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>>> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
>>> or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
>>> doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free
>>> Software
>>> JVM 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

The fact that Oracle would even come up with something like this "Oracle's
position was that Google should have to license code from them." is just
messed up. And these kind of business practices are exactly the reason why
to stay away. Of course every company is there to make money. You look at
Google or FB and see how much open source contribution they have
done. Oracle doesnt come anywhere close to that.

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:08 PM, Edward Capriolo 
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> This is a subjective question and of course it would turn into
>> opinionated answers and I think we should welcome that (Nothing wrong in
>> debating a topic). we have many such debates as SE's such as programming
>> language comparisons, Architectural debates, Framework/Library debates and
>> so on. people who don't like this conversation can simply refrain from
>> following this thread right. I don't know why they choose to Jump in if
>> they dont like a topic
>>
>> Sun is a great company no doubt! I don't know if Oracle is. Things like
>> this https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/220136-google-plans-
>> to-remove-oracles-java-apis-from-android-n is what pisses me about
>> Oracle which gives an impression that they are not up for open source. It
>> would be awesome to see JVM running on more and more devices (not less) so
>> Google taking away Oracle Java API's from Android is a big failure from
>> Oracle.
>>
>> JVM is a great piece of Software and by far there isn't anything yet that
>> comes close. And there are great people who worked at SUN at that time.
>> open the JDK source code and read it. you will encounter some great ideas
>> and Algorithms.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Benjamin Roth 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Does this discussion really make sense any more? To me it seems it
 turned opinionated and religious. From my point of view anything that has
 to be said was said.

 Am 02.01.2017 21:27 schrieb "Edward Capriolo" :

>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans  > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo <
>> edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra
>> is a
>> > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>> > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>> > implicit dependency)."
>> >
>> > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The
>> oracle JVM
>> > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
>> company.
>>
>> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
>> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
>> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
>> licensing).
>>
>> Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
>> Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.
>>
>> The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
>> the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
>> you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
>> software).
>>
>> > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a
>> driver
>> > hosted on github but made my a company.
>>
>> It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
>> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.
>>
>> > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
>> dedicated
>> > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking
>> over
>> > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
>> maintained
>> > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.
>>
>> I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
>> or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
>> doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
>> JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
>> do contribute to it).
>>
>>
>> --
>> Eric Evans
>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>>
>
> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
> licensing).
>
> Lets be clear:
> What I am saying is avoiding 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 8:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> This is a subjective question and of course it would turn into opinionated
> answers and I think we should welcome that (Nothing wrong in debating a
> topic). we have many such debates as SE's such as programming language
> comparisons, Architectural debates, Framework/Library debates and so on.
> people who don't like this conversation can simply refrain from following
> this thread right. I don't know why they choose to Jump in if they dont
> like a topic
>
> Sun is a great company no doubt! I don't know if Oracle is. Things like
> this https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/220136-google-
> plans-to-remove-oracles-java-apis-from-android-n is what pisses me about
> Oracle which gives an impression that they are not up for open source. It
> would be awesome to see JVM running on more and more devices (not less) so
> Google taking away Oracle Java API's from Android is a big failure from
> Oracle.
>
> JVM is a great piece of Software and by far there isn't anything yet that
> comes close. And there are great people who worked at SUN at that time.
> open the JDK source code and read it. you will encounter some great ideas
> and Algorithms.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Benjamin Roth 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Does this discussion really make sense any more? To me it seems it
>>> turned opinionated and religious. From my point of view anything that has
>>> to be said was said.
>>>
>>> Am 02.01.2017 21:27 schrieb "Edward Capriolo" :
>>>


 On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans 
 wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo <
> edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra
> is a
> > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> > implicit dependency)."
> >
> > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The
> oracle JVM
> > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
> company.
>
> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
> licensing).
>
> Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
> Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.
>
> The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
> the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
> you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
> software).
>
> > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a
> driver
> > hosted on github but made my a company.
>
> It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.
>
> > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
> dedicated
> > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking
> over
> > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
> maintained
> > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.
>
> I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
> or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
> doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
> JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
> do contribute to it).
>
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>

 Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
 which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
 talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
 licensing).

 Lets be clear:
 What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license

 Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
 use.

 https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml

 As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
 Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
 better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
 meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.

 * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was
 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

This is a subjective question and of course it would turn into opinionated
answers and I think we should welcome that (Nothing wrong in debating a
topic). we have many such debates as SE's such as programming language
comparisons, Architectural debates, Framework/Library debates and so on.
people who don't like this conversation can simply refrain from following
this thread right. I don't know why they choose to Jump in if they dont
like a topic

Sun is a great company no doubt! I don't know if Oracle is. Things like
this
https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/220136-google-plans-to-remove-oracles-java-apis-from-android-n
is what pisses me about Oracle which gives an impression that they are not
up for open source. It would be awesome to see JVM running on more and more
devices (not less) so Google taking away Oracle Java API's from Android is
a big failure from Oracle.

JVM is a great piece of Software and by far there isn't anything yet that
comes close. And there are great people who worked at SUN at that time.
open the JDK source code and read it. you will encounter some great ideas
and Algorithms.





On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Edward Capriolo 
wrote:

>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Benjamin Roth 
> wrote:
>
>> Does this discussion really make sense any more? To me it seems it turned
>> opinionated and religious. From my point of view anything that has to be
>> said was said.
>>
>> Am 02.01.2017 21:27 schrieb "Edward Capriolo" :
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
 wrote:
 > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is
 a
 > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
 > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
 > implicit dependency)."
 >
 > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The
 oracle JVM
 > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
 company.

 Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
 which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
 talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
 licensing).

 Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
 Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.

 The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
 the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
 you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
 software).

 > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a
 driver
 > hosted on github but made my a company.

 It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
 is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.

 > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
 dedicated
 > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking
 over
 > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
 maintained
 > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.

 I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
 JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
 or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
 doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
 JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
 do contribute to it).


 --
 Eric Evans
 john.eric.ev...@gmail.com

>>>
>>> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
>>> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
>>> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
>>> licensing).
>>>
>>> Lets be clear:
>>> What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
>>>
>>> Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
>>> use.
>>>
>>> https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
>>>
>>> As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
>>> Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
>>> better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
>>> meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
>>>
>>> * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was
>>> Acunu. They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache
>>> Cassandra. http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-start
>>> up-acunu-raises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/. That product

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Benjamin Roth 
wrote:

> Does this discussion really make sense any more? To me it seems it turned
> opinionated and religious. From my point of view anything that has to be
> said was said.
>
> Am 02.01.2017 21:27 schrieb "Edward Capriolo" :
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>>> wrote:
>>> > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
>>> > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>>> > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>>> > implicit dependency)."
>>> >
>>> > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The oracle
>>> JVM
>>> > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
>>> company.
>>>
>>> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
>>> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
>>> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
>>> licensing).
>>>
>>> Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
>>> Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.
>>>
>>> The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
>>> the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
>>> you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
>>> software).
>>>
>>> > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a
>>> driver
>>> > hosted on github but made my a company.
>>>
>>> It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
>>> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.
>>>
>>> > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
>>> dedicated
>>> > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking
>>> over
>>> > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
>>> maintained
>>> > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.
>>>
>>> I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>>> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
>>> or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
>>> doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
>>> JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
>>> do contribute to it).
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Eric Evans
>>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
>> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
>> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
>> licensing).
>>
>> Lets be clear:
>> What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
>>
>> Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to
>> use.
>>
>> https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
>>
>> As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
>> Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
>> better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
>> meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
>>
>> * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was Acunu.
>> They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache Cassandra.
>> http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-start
>> up-acunu-raises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/. That product
>> no longer exists.
>>
>> "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
>>
>> What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a "free
>> software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
>> popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
>> including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech companies
>> in the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
>> Specifically I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be
>> viable.
>>
>> There are two specific reasons.
>> 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
>> 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
>> that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in a
>> sane way.
>>
>> I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++
>> 11, 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC
>> to microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java
>> only wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and
>> binary code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
>> 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Benjamin Roth]

Does this discussion really make sense any more? To me it seems it turned
opinionated and religious. From my point of view anything that has to be
said was said.

Am 02.01.2017 21:27 schrieb "Edward Capriolo" :

>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans 
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>> wrote:
>> > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
>> > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>> > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>> > implicit dependency)."
>> >
>> > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The oracle
>> JVM
>> > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
>> company.
>>
>> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
>> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
>> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
>> licensing).
>>
>> Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
>> Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.
>>
>> The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
>> the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
>> you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
>> software).
>>
>> > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a driver
>> > hosted on github but made my a company.
>>
>> It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
>> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.
>>
>> > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
>> dedicated
>> > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking over
>> > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
>> maintained
>> > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.
>>
>> I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
>> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
>> or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
>> doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
>> JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
>> do contribute to it).
>>
>>
>> --
>> Eric Evans
>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>>
>
> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
> licensing).
>
> Lets be clear:
> What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license
>
> Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to use.
>
>
> https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml
>
> As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
> Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
> better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
> meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.
>
> * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was Acunu.
> They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache Cassandra.
> http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-raises-3-6-
> million-to-launch-its-first-product/. That product no longer exists.
>
> "I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"
>
> What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a "free
> software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
> popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
> including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech companies
> in the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
> Specifically I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be
> viable.
>
> There are two specific reasons.
> 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
> 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
> that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in a
> sane way.
>
> I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++ 11,
> 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC to
> microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java only
> wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and binary
> code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
> language would suffer.
>
> "It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it."
>
> LOL. Sure a database with a driver is 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Eric Evans 
wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
> > "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
> > Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> > commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> > implicit dependency)."
> >
> > We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The oracle
> JVM
> > is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a
> company.
>
> Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
> which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
> talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
> licensing).
>
> Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
> Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.
>
> The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
> the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
> you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
> software).
>
> > That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a driver
> > hosted on github but made my a company.
>
> It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
> is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.
>
> > The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart
> dedicated
> > people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking over
> > sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
> maintained
> > by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.
>
> I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
> JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
> or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
> doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
> JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
> do contribute to it).
>
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
>

Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
licensing).

Lets be clear:
What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license

Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to use.

https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml

As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running
Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run
better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly
meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra.

* The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was Acunu.
They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache Cassandra.
http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-raises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/.
That product no longer exists.

"I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,"

What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a "free
software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the
popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today
including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech companies
in the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable.
Specifically I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be
viable.

There are two specific reasons.
1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening
2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new features
that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening in a
sane way.

I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++ 11,
14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux GCC to
microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java only
wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and binary
code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the
language would suffer.

"It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it."

LOL. Sure a database with a driver is very useful. I mean it sits there
flushing empty memtables and writing to its log file. You can run nodetool
ring and imagine where data would go if you could put data into it. Very
exciting stuff.

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Eric Evans]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 9:15 PM, Edward Capriolo  wrote:
> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> implicit dependency)."
>
> We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The oracle JVM
> is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a company.

Are we?  There are many definitions for the word "free", only one of
which means "without cost"; I assumed it was obvious that I was
talking about licensing terms (and of course the implications of that
licensing).

Cassandra is Free Software by virtue of the fact that it is Apache
Licensed.  You are Free (as in Freedom) to modify and redistribute it.

The Oracle JVM ships with a commercial license.  It is free only in
the sense that you are not required to pay anything to use it, (i.e.
you are not Free to do much of anything other than use it to run Java
software).

> That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a driver
> hosted on github but made my a company.

It is very different IME.  Cassandra requires a JVM to function, this
is a hard dependency.  A driver is merely a means to make use of it.

> The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart dedicated
> people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking over
> sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x maintained
> by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.

I don't how to read any of this.  It sounds like you're saying that a
JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project,
or maybe that you just really like Oracle, I'm honestly not sure.  It
doesn't seem relevant though, because there is in fact a Free Software
JVM (and in addition to some mere mortals, the fine people at Oracle
do contribute to it).


-- 
Eric Evans
john.eric.ev...@gmail.com

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Jonathan Haddad]

> I dont mean to say JVM shouldn't be in hands of large entity but rather
If it was in the hands of companies like Google or Microsoft or say
DataStax I would have been more happy :)

Considering DataStax just announced they are pulling back from open source
Cassandra and are focusing on their DataStax enterprise product instead, I
would strongly disagree.

http://www.datastax.com/2016/11/serving-customers-serving-the-community

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 2:24 PM Kant Kodali  wrote:

> The observations that James Gosling did aren't just relevant in the year
> 2010 but rather he expressed Oracle's DNA. He clearly expressed how the
> upper management in that company works. And even today it works the same
> way starting from decades ago.
> If you know a character of someone you can predict what he or she would
> do. And in that video Gosling more or less described the character of
> Oracle!
>
> I dont mean to say JVM shouldn't be in hands of large entity but rather If
> it was in the hands of companies like Google or Microsoft or say DataStax I
> would have been more happy :)
>
> Above all, I love JVM and the work of many smart people that are behind.
> I do wish Java 9 takes off really well with the module system where
> containerized deployments
>
>
> Google and andriod (j++--) ??? I don't even about j++-- existence. any
> links? I tried a quick google search but couldn't find anything.
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Brice Dutheil 
> wrote:
>
> A note on this video from the respected James Gosling, is that it is from
> 2010, when Oracle was new to the Java stewardship ecosystem. The company
> came a long since. I'm not saying everything is perfect. But I doubt that a
> product such as the JVM will be as good without a company guidance.
>
> The module system is interesting and is good thing regardless of the
> Oracle features. Having AWT classes for a server always annoyed me, for IoT
> as well. I'm really excited about Java 9.
>
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
> @Edward Agreed JVM is awesome and it is a work of many smart people and
> this is obvious if one looks into the JDK code. But given Oracle history of
> business practices and other decisions it is a bit hard to convince oneself
> that everything is going to be OK and that they actually care about open
> source. Even the module system that they are trying to come up with is
> something that motivated by the problem they have faced internally.
>
> To reiterate again just watch this video
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ei-rbULWoA
>
> My statements are not solely based on this video but I certainly would
> give good weight for James Gosling.
>
> I tend to think that Oracle has not closed Java because they know that
> cant get money from users because these days not many people are willing to
> pay even for distributed databases so I don't think anyone would pay for
> programming language. In short, Let me end by saying Oracle just has lot of
> self interest but I really hope that I am wrong since I am a big fan of JVM.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
> Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious to
> see how Cassandra would leverage that.
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
> I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
> trying to say the same thing.
>
> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> implicit dependency)."
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil 
> wrote:
>
> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>
> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
> 
>
> @Ben Manes
>
> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still
> some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security
> libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for
> everyone.
>
> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
> think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the
> Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
>  the builds. Another example OpenJDK
> build installed on RHEL is certified
> . Canonical probably is
> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed
> on the signatories
> 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

The observations that James Gosling did aren't just relevant in the year
2010 but rather he expressed Oracle's DNA. He clearly expressed how the
upper management in that company works. And even today it works the same
way starting from decades ago.
If you know a character of someone you can predict what he or she would do.
And in that video Gosling more or less described the character of Oracle!

I dont mean to say JVM shouldn't be in hands of large entity but rather If
it was in the hands of companies like Google or Microsoft or say DataStax I
would have been more happy :)

Above all, I love JVM and the work of many smart people that are behind.  I
do wish Java 9 takes off really well with the module system where
containerized deployments


Google and andriod (j++--) ??? I don't even about j++-- existence. any
links? I tried a quick google search but couldn't find anything.

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Brice Dutheil 
wrote:

> A note on this video from the respected James Gosling, is that it is from
> 2010, when Oracle was new to the Java stewardship ecosystem. The company
> came a long since. I'm not saying everything is perfect. But I doubt that a
> product such as the JVM will be as good without a company guidance.
>
> The module system is interesting and is good thing regardless of the
> Oracle features. Having AWT classes for a server always annoyed me, for IoT
> as well. I'm really excited about Java 9.
>
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> @Edward Agreed JVM is awesome and it is a work of many smart people and
>>> this is obvious if one looks into the JDK code. But given Oracle history of
>>> business practices and other decisions it is a bit hard to convince oneself
>>> that everything is going to be OK and that they actually care about open
>>> source. Even the module system that they are trying to come up with is
>>> something that motivated by the problem they have faced internally.
>>>
>>> To reiterate again just watch this video https://www.youtube.com/
>>> watch?v=9ei-rbULWoA
>>>
>>> My statements are not solely based on this video but I certainly would
>>> give good weight for James Gosling.
>>>
>>> I tend to think that Oracle has not closed Java because they know that
>>> cant get money from users because these days not many people are willing to
>>> pay even for distributed databases so I don't think anyone would pay for
>>> programming language. In short, Let me end by saying Oracle just has lot of
>>> self interest but I really hope that I am wrong since I am a big fan of JVM.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious
> to see how Cassandra would leverage that.
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>> I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
>> trying to say the same thing.
>>
>> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra
>> is a
>> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>> implicit dependency)."
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil <
>> brice.duth...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>>
>>> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
>>> 
>>>
>>> @Ben Manes
>>>
>>> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is
>>> still some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like
>>> security libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe 
>>> not
>>> for everyone.
>>>
>>> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I
>>> don’t think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For
>>> example the Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and
>>> certifies  the builds. Another
>>> example OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified
>>> . Canonical probably is
>>> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are 
>>> listed
>>> on the signatories
>>> 
>>> but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories 
>>> list
>>> again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to
>>> Debian 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Brice Dutheil]

A note on this video from the respected James Gosling, is that it is from
2010, when Oracle was new to the Java stewardship ecosystem. The company
came a long since. I'm not saying everything is perfect. But I doubt that a
product such as the JVM will be as good without a company guidance.

The module system is interesting and is good thing regardless of the Oracle
features. Having AWT classes for a server always annoyed me, for IoT as
well. I'm really excited about Java 9.


-- Brice

On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Edward Capriolo 
wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> @Edward Agreed JVM is awesome and it is a work of many smart people and
>> this is obvious if one looks into the JDK code. But given Oracle history of
>> business practices and other decisions it is a bit hard to convince oneself
>> that everything is going to be OK and that they actually care about open
>> source. Even the module system that they are trying to come up with is
>> something that motivated by the problem they have faced internally.
>>
>> To reiterate again just watch this video https://www.youtube.com/
>> watch?v=9ei-rbULWoA
>>
>> My statements are not solely based on this video but I certainly would
>> give good weight for James Gosling.
>>
>> I tend to think that Oracle has not closed Java because they know that
>> cant get money from users because these days not many people are willing to
>> pay even for distributed databases so I don't think anyone would pay for
>> programming language. In short, Let me end by saying Oracle just has lot of
>> self interest but I really hope that I am wrong since I am a big fan of JVM.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious
 to see how Cassandra would leverage that.

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
> trying to say the same thing.
>
> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is
> a
> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> implicit dependency)."
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil <
> brice.duth...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>
>> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
>> 
>>
>> @Ben Manes
>>
>> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is
>> still some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like
>> security libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not
>> for everyone.
>>
>> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
>> think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example 
>> the
>> Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
>>  the builds. Another example
>> OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified
>> . Canonical probably is
>> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are 
>> listed
>> on the signatories
>> 
>> but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories 
>> list
>> again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to
>> Debian  (
>> linkedin ), but not sure again
>> the TCK is passed for each build.
>>
>> Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is
>> a reality
>> 
>> .
>>
>> While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still
>> double check before using any OpenJDK builds.
>> ​
>>
>> -- Brice
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot <
>> voytek.jar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
>>> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free 
>>> -
>>> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that 
>>> some
>>> are using non-free products for free.
>>>
>>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 5:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> @Edward Agreed JVM is awesome and it is a work of many smart people and
> this is obvious if one looks into the JDK code. But given Oracle history of
> business practices and other decisions it is a bit hard to convince oneself
> that everything is going to be OK and that they actually care about open
> source. Even the module system that they are trying to come up with is
> something that motivated by the problem they have faced internally.
>
> To reiterate again just watch this video https://www.youtube.com/
> watch?v=9ei-rbULWoA
>
> My statements are not solely based on this video but I certainly would
> give good weight for James Gosling.
>
> I tend to think that Oracle has not closed Java because they know that
> cant get money from users because these days not many people are willing to
> pay even for distributed databases so I don't think anyone would pay for
> programming language. In short, Let me end by saying Oracle just has lot of
> self interest but I really hope that I am wrong since I am a big fan of JVM.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious
>>> to see how Cassandra would leverage that.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
 trying to say the same thing.

 "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
 Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
 commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
 implicit dependency)."

 On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil  wrote:

> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>
> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
> 
>
> @Ben Manes
>
> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is
> still some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like
> security libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not
> for everyone.
>
> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
> think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the
> Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
>  the builds. Another example
> OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified
> . Canonical probably is
> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are 
> listed
> on the signatories
> 
> but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list
> again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to
> Debian  (
> linkedin ), but not sure again
> the TCK is passed for each build.
>
> Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is
> a reality
> 
> .
>
> While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still
> double check before using any OpenJDK builds.
> ​
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot <
> voytek.jar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
>> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
>> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that 
>> some
>> are using non-free products for free.
>>
>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co
>>> .uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=
>>> 1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>>>
>>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>>> dealing with Java in General.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

>>>
>> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
>> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>> implicit dependency)."
>>
>> We are a bit 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

@Edward Agreed JVM is awesome and it is a work of many smart people and
this is obvious if one looks into the JDK code. But given Oracle history of
business practices and other decisions it is a bit hard to convince oneself
that everything is going to be OK and that they actually care about open
source. Even the module system that they are trying to come up with is
something that motivated by the problem they have faced internally.

To reiterate again just watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=9ei-rbULWoA

My statements are not solely based on this video but I certainly would give
good weight for James Gosling.

I tend to think that Oracle has not closed Java because they know that cant
get money from users because these days not many people are willing to pay
even for distributed databases so I don't think anyone would pay for
programming language. In short, Let me end by saying Oracle just has lot of
self interest but I really hope that I am wrong since I am a big fan of JVM.





On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Edward Capriolo 
wrote:

>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious to
>> see how Cassandra would leverage that.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
>>> trying to say the same thing.
>>>
>>> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
>>> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>>> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>>> implicit dependency)."
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.

 Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
 

 @Ben Manes

 Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still
 some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security
 libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for
 everyone.

 Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
 think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the
 Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
  the builds. Another example
 OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified
 . Canonical probably is
 running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed
 on the signatories
 
 but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list
 again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to Debian
  (linkedin
 ), but not sure again the TCK is
 passed for each build.

 Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a
 reality
 
 .

 While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still double
 check before using any OpenJDK builds.
 ​

 -- Brice

 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot  wrote:

> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some
> are using non-free products for free.
>
> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co
>> .uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=
>> 1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>>
>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>> dealing with Java in General.
>>
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> implicit dependency)."
>
> We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The oracle JVM
> is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a company.
>
> That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a driver
> hosted 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious to
> see how Cassandra would leverage that.
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
>> trying to say the same thing.
>>
>> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
>> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
>> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
>> implicit dependency)."
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>>
>>> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
>>> 
>>>
>>> @Ben Manes
>>>
>>> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still
>>> some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security
>>> libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for
>>> everyone.
>>>
>>> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
>>> think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the
>>> Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
>>>  the builds. Another example
>>> OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified
>>> . Canonical probably is
>>> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed
>>> on the signatories
>>> 
>>> but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list
>>> again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to Debian
>>>  (linkedin
>>> ), but not sure again the TCK is
>>> passed for each build.
>>>
>>> Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a
>>> reality
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>> While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still double
>>> check before using any OpenJDK builds.
>>> ​
>>>
>>> -- Brice
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
 misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
 the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some
 are using non-free products for free.

 Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.

 On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali 
 wrote:

> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co
> .uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=
> 1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>
> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
> dealing with Java in General.
>
>
>

>>>
>>
>
"I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
implicit dependency)."

We are a bit loose here with terms "free" and "commercial". The oracle JVM
is open source, it is free to use and the trademark is owned by a company.

That is not much different then using a tool for cassandra like a driver
hosted on github but made my a company.

The thing about a JVM is that like a kernel you want really smart dedicated
people working on it. Oracle has moved the JVM forward since taking over
sun. You can not just manage a JVM like say the freebsd port of x
maintained by 3 part time dudes that all get paid to do something else.

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

Java 9 Module system looks really interesting. I would be very curious to
see how Cassandra would leverage that.

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was
> trying to say the same thing.
>
> "I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> implicit dependency)."
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil 
> wrote:
>
>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>
>> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
>> 
>>
>> @Ben Manes
>>
>> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still
>> some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security
>> libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for
>> everyone.
>>
>> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
>> think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the
>> Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
>>  the builds. Another example
>> OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified
>> . Canonical probably is
>> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed
>> on the signatories
>> 
>> but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list
>> again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to Debian
>>  (linkedin
>> ), but not sure again the TCK is
>> passed for each build.
>>
>> Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a
>> reality
>> 
>> .
>>
>> While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still double
>> check before using any OpenJDK builds.
>> ​
>>
>> -- Brice
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
>>> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
>>> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some
>>> are using non-free products for free.
>>>
>>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_
 java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra
 recommends Oracle JVM?

 JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
 Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
 dealing with Java in General.



>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was trying
to say the same thing.

"I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
implicit dependency)."

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil 
wrote:

> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>
> Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page
> 
>
> @Ben Manes
>
> Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still
> some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security
> libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for
> everyone.
>
> Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t
> think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the
> Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
>  the builds. Another example OpenJDK
> build installed on RHEL is certified
> . Canonical probably is
> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed
> on the signatories
> 
> but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list
> again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to Debian
>  (linkedin
> ), but not sure again the TCK is
> passed for each build.
>
> Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a
> reality
> 
> .
>
> While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still double
> check before using any OpenJDK builds.
> ​
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot 
> wrote:
>
>> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
>> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
>> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some
>> are using non-free products for free.
>>
>> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_
>>> java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra
>>> recommends Oracle JVM?
>>>
>>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>>> dealing with Java in General.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Brice Dutheil]

Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.

Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page


@Ben Manes

Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still
some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security
libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for
everyone.

Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t think
all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the Zulu
OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies
 the builds. Another example OpenJDK
build installed on RHEL is certified
. Canonical probably is running
TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed on the
signatories
 but
not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list
again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to Debian
 (linkedin
), but not sure again the TCK is passed
for each build.

Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a
reality

.

While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still double
check before using any OpenJDK builds.
​

-- Brice

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot 
wrote:

> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some
> are using non-free products for free.
>
> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_
>> java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra
>> recommends Oracle JVM?
>>
>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>> dealing with Java in General.
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Voytek Jarnot]

Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm
misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free -
the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some
are using non-free products for free.

Pretty much a non-story, it seems like.

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_
> targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why
> Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>
> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from Oracle
> as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are dealing with
> Java in General.
>
>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Michael Shuler]

On 12/21/2016 08:38 AM, Eric Evans wrote:
> I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
> Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
> commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
> implicit dependency).

Just a bit of clarification. The debian packages depend on OpenJDK as
the first preference, then the meta-package that may be satisfied by a
custom rolled Oracle-based deb:

  https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/trunk/debian/control#L14

I dug through the pseudo packages that RHEL/CentOS provide in the vendor
OpenJDK rpms and selected 'jre' when I committed:

  https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/trunk/redhat/cassandra.spec#L23

In both cases, an install of packaged deb or rpm will pull in OpenJDK by
default, unless the user goes out of his/her way to override this.

-- 
Kind regards,
Michael

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Eric Evans]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
> Looking at this
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669
> I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?

The long answer probably dates back to before the Oracle JVM was as
closely coupled to OpenJDK as it is now.  There were times when you'd
have to choose the sweet spot between a matrix of issues between
various versions of each, and Oracle often came out on top.

But that was in the past, OpenJDK is much more viable these days
(Cassandra works great with it IMO), and so the short answer is: It's
easier.  It's easier to test and reproduce with one version, and then
recommend that version to everyone.

> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from Oracle
> as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are dealing with
> Java in General.

I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a
Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on
commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an
implicit dependency).


-- 
Eric Evans
john.eric.ev...@gmail.com

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Edward Capriolo]

On Wednesday, December 21, 2016, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ei-rbULWoA
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Kant Kodali  > wrote:
>
>> https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/guide/current/
>> _java_virtual_machine.html
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Kant Kodali > > wrote:
>>
>>> The fact is Oracle is horrible :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Brice Dutheil >> > wrote:
>>>
 Let's not debate opinion on the Oracle stewardship here, we certainly
 have different views that come from different experiences.

 Let's discuss facts instead :)

 -- Brice

 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Kant Kodali > wrote:

> yeah well I don't think Oracle is treating Java the way Google is
> treating Go and I am not a big fan of Go mainly because I understand the
> JVM is far more robust than anything that is out there.
>
> "Oracle just doesn't understand open source" These are the words from
> James Gosling himself
>
> I do think its better to stay away from Oracle as we never know when
> they would switch open source to closed source. Given their history of
> practices their statements are not credible.
>
> I am pretty sure the community would take care of OpenJDK.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Brice Dutheil <
> brice.duth...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> The problem described in this article is different than what you have
>> on your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, 
>> as
>> The Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no
>> substantial proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is
>> clickbait.
>>
>> Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
>> OpenJDK :
>>
>>-
>>
>>There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk.
>>Where there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in 
>> Hotspot
>>like font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source
>>alternatives which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe 
>> they
>>also have minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like 
>> Java
>>Mission Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
>>Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date
>>than OpenJDK.
>>
>>So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may
>>not have the same performance or the same bugs or the same security 
>> fixes.
>>(Unless are your ready to test that with your production servers and 
>> your
>>production data).
>>
>>I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
>>configuration when they test Cassandra.
>>-
>>
>>There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community.
>>Oracle can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.
>>
>>Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team.
>>Not sure everyone can afford that.
>>
>> As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to
>> work on the JVM to make it great.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> ​
>>
>> -- Brice
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali > > wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co
>>> .uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=
>>> 1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>>>
>>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>>> dealing with Java in General.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>
Generally a good decision is to balance between a platform you are familiar
with and a platform most commonly deployed in production.

Ie even if i saw a talk from facebook that says cassandra is awesome on
solaris x running on cool threads chips, but if i was at a windows intel
shop i might not pain myself with the burden.

Cassandra uses specific native/unsafe libraries not guarenteed to be
portable. Eg once i was using a non sun jvm and the saved key caches would
not load.

As to oracle not knowing open source, maybe not but sun had its own issues,
see the story about apache harmony and sun unwilling to certify the harmony
jvm. What 

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ei-rbULWoA

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/guide/
> current/_java_virtual_machine.html
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> The fact is Oracle is horrible :)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Brice Dutheil 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Let's not debate opinion on the Oracle stewardship here, we certainly
>>> have different views that come from different experiences.
>>>
>>> Let's discuss facts instead :)
>>>
>>> -- Brice
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 yeah well I don't think Oracle is treating Java the way Google is
 treating Go and I am not a big fan of Go mainly because I understand the
 JVM is far more robust than anything that is out there.

 "Oracle just doesn't understand open source" These are the words from
 James Gosling himself

 I do think its better to stay away from Oracle as we never know when
 they would switch open source to closed source. Given their history of
 practices their statements are not credible.

 I am pretty sure the community would take care of OpenJDK.





 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Brice Dutheil  wrote:

> The problem described in this article is different than what you have
> on your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, as
> The Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no
> substantial proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is
> clickbait.
>
> Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
> OpenJDK :
>
>-
>
>There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk.
>Where there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in 
> Hotspot
>like font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source
>alternatives which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe 
> they
>also have minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like 
> Java
>Mission Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
>Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date
>than OpenJDK.
>
>So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may not
>have the same performance or the same bugs or the same security fixes.
>(Unless are your ready to test that with your production servers and 
> your
>production data).
>
>I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
>configuration when they test Cassandra.
>-
>
>There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community.
>Oracle can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.
>
>Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team.
>Not sure everyone can afford that.
>
> As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to
> work on the JVM to make it great.
>
> Cheers,
> ​
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co
>> .uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=
>> 1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>>
>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>> dealing with Java in General.
>>
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/guide/current/_java_virtual_machine.html

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> The fact is Oracle is horrible :)
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Brice Dutheil 
> wrote:
>
>> Let's not debate opinion on the Oracle stewardship here, we certainly
>> have different views that come from different experiences.
>>
>> Let's discuss facts instead :)
>>
>> -- Brice
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> yeah well I don't think Oracle is treating Java the way Google is
>>> treating Go and I am not a big fan of Go mainly because I understand the
>>> JVM is far more robust than anything that is out there.
>>>
>>> "Oracle just doesn't understand open source" These are the words from
>>> James Gosling himself
>>>
>>> I do think its better to stay away from Oracle as we never know when
>>> they would switch open source to closed source. Given their history of
>>> practices their statements are not credible.
>>>
>>> I am pretty sure the community would take care of OpenJDK.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Brice Dutheil 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 The problem described in this article is different than what you have
 on your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, as
 The Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no
 substantial proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is
 clickbait.

 Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
 OpenJDK :

-

There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk.
Where there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in 
 Hotspot
like font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source
alternatives which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe 
 they
also have minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like 
 Java
Mission Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date
than OpenJDK.

So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may not
have the same performance or the same bugs or the same security fixes.
(Unless are your ready to test that with your production servers and 
 your
production data).

I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
configuration when they test Cassandra.
-

There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community.
Oracle can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.

Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team. Not
sure everyone can afford that.

 As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to
 work on the JVM to make it great.

 Cheers,
 ​

 -- Brice

 On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co
> .uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=
> 1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>
> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
> dealing with Java in General.
>
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

The fact is Oracle is horrible :)


On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:54 AM, Brice Dutheil 
wrote:

> Let's not debate opinion on the Oracle stewardship here, we certainly have
> different views that come from different experiences.
>
> Let's discuss facts instead :)
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> yeah well I don't think Oracle is treating Java the way Google is
>> treating Go and I am not a big fan of Go mainly because I understand the
>> JVM is far more robust than anything that is out there.
>>
>> "Oracle just doesn't understand open source" These are the words from
>> James Gosling himself
>>
>> I do think its better to stay away from Oracle as we never know when they
>> would switch open source to closed source. Given their history of practices
>> their statements are not credible.
>>
>> I am pretty sure the community would take care of OpenJDK.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Brice Dutheil 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The problem described in this article is different than what you have on
>>> your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, as The
>>> Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no substantial
>>> proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is clickbait.
>>>
>>> Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
>>> OpenJDK :
>>>
>>>-
>>>
>>>There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk. Where
>>>there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in Hotspot like
>>>font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source alternatives
>>>which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe they also have
>>>minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like Java Mission
>>>Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
>>>Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date
>>>than OpenJDK.
>>>
>>>So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may not
>>>have the same performance or the same bugs or the same security fixes.
>>>(Unless are your ready to test that with your production servers and your
>>>production data).
>>>
>>>I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
>>>configuration when they test Cassandra.
>>>-
>>>
>>>There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community.
>>>Oracle can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.
>>>
>>>Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team. Not
>>>sure everyone can afford that.
>>>
>>> As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to work
>>> on the JVM to make it great.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> ​
>>>
>>> -- Brice
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_
 java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra
 recommends Oracle JVM?

 JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
 Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
 dealing with Java in General.



>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Brice Dutheil]

Let's not debate opinion on the Oracle stewardship here, we certainly have
different views that come from different experiences.

Let's discuss facts instead :)

-- Brice

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> yeah well I don't think Oracle is treating Java the way Google is treating
> Go and I am not a big fan of Go mainly because I understand the JVM is far
> more robust than anything that is out there.
>
> "Oracle just doesn't understand open source" These are the words from
> James Gosling himself
>
> I do think its better to stay away from Oracle as we never know when they
> would switch open source to closed source. Given their history of practices
> their statements are not credible.
>
> I am pretty sure the community would take care of OpenJDK.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Brice Dutheil 
> wrote:
>
>> The problem described in this article is different than what you have on
>> your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, as The
>> Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no substantial
>> proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is clickbait.
>>
>> Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
>> OpenJDK :
>>
>>-
>>
>>There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk. Where
>>there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in Hotspot like
>>font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source alternatives
>>which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe they also have
>>minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like Java Mission
>>Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
>>Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date than
>>OpenJDK.
>>
>>So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may not
>>have the same performance or the same bugs or the same security fixes.
>>(Unless are your ready to test that with your production servers and your
>>production data).
>>
>>I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
>>configuration when they test Cassandra.
>>-
>>
>>There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community.
>>Oracle can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.
>>
>>Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team. Not
>>sure everyone can afford that.
>>
>> As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to work
>> on the JVM to make it great.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> ​
>>
>> -- Brice
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_
>>> java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra
>>> recommends Oracle JVM?
>>>
>>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>>> dealing with Java in General.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

yeah well I don't think Oracle is treating Java the way Google is treating
Go and I am not a big fan of Go mainly because I understand the JVM is far
more robust than anything that is out there.

"Oracle just doesn't understand open source" These are the words from James
Gosling himself

I do think its better to stay away from Oracle as we never know when they
would switch open source to closed source. Given their history of practices
their statements are not credible.

I am pretty sure the community would take care of OpenJDK.





On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Brice Dutheil 
wrote:

> The problem described in this article is different than what you have on
> your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, as The
> Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no substantial
> proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is clickbait.
>
> Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
> OpenJDK :
>
>-
>
>There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk. Where
>there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in Hotspot like
>font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source alternatives
>which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe they also have
>minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like Java Mission
>Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
>Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date than
>OpenJDK.
>
>So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may not
>have the same performance or the same bugs or the same security fixes.
>(Unless are your ready to test that with your production servers and your
>production data).
>
>I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
>configuration when they test Cassandra.
>-
>
>There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community.
>Oracle can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.
>
>Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team. Not
>sure everyone can afford that.
>
> As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to work
> on the JVM to make it great.
>
> Cheers,
> ​
>
> -- Brice
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_
>> java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra
>> recommends Oracle JVM?
>>
>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from
>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are
>> dealing with Java in General.
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Brice Dutheil]

The problem described in this article is different than what you have on
your servers and I’ll add this article should be reaad with caution, as The
Register is known for sensationalism. The article itself has no substantial
proof or enough details. In my opinion this article is clickbait.

Anyway there’s several point to think of instead of just swicthing to
OpenJDK :

   -

   There is technical differences between Oracle JDK and openjdk. Where
   there’s licensing issues some libraries are closed source in Hotspot like
   font, rasterizer or cryptography and OpenJDK use open source alternatives
   which leads to different bugs or performance. I believe they also have
   minor differences in the hotspot code to plug in stuff like Java Mission
   Control or Flight Recorder or hotpost specific options.
   Also I believe that Oracle JDK is more tested or more up to date than
   OpenJDK.

   So while OpenJDK is functionnaly the same as Oracle JDK it may not have
   the same performance or the same bugs or the same security fixes. (Unless
   are your ready to test that with your production servers and your
   production data).

   I don’t know if datastax have released the details of their
   configuration when they test Cassandra.
   -

   There’s also a question of support. OpeJDK is for the community. Oracle
   can offer support but maybe only for Oracle JDK.

   Twitter uses OpenJDK, but they have their own JVM support team. Not sure
   everyone can afford that.

As a side note I’ll add that Oracle is paying talented engineers to work on
the JVM to make it great.

Cheers,
​

-- Brice

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_
> targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why
> Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?
>
> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from Oracle
> as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are dealing with
> Java in General.
>
>
>

Why does Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM instead of OpenJDK?

[Kant Kodali]

Looking at this
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669
I don't know why Cassandra recommends Oracle JVM?

JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from Oracle
as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are dealing with
Java in General.