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 <k...@peernova.com> 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 >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Potentially_unreliable_sources#News_media> >> >> @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 >> <https://www.azul.com/products/zulu/> the builds. Another example >> OpenJDK build installed on RHEL is certified >> <https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013>. Canonical probably is >> running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed >> on the signatories >> <http://openjdk.java.net/groups/conformance/JckAccess/jck-access.html> >> 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 >> <https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2015/01/msg00015.html> (linkedin >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ebourg>), but not sure again the TCK is >> passed for each build. >> >> Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a >> reality >> <https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/commit/00a9c5c080f2a5fd1510bc0716db7afe06cbd017> >> . >> >> 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 <k...@peernova.com> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
