On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 10:25:52PM -0700, Cris J. Holdorph wrote: > Seth R Arnold Writes: > > Chris, could you go into more detail why? I think the effort will be great, > > and the returns might be small. (I am not sure it is worth it...) > > > > But, I think you are reading the idea of 'fork' incorrectly. It could be > > that I am also incorrectly interpreting it... The way I saw Ean's proposal, > > we would work on a free implementation based off of an earlier version of > > JDK that allows forks -- and we would implement java exactly as the spec > > suggests, keeping up with the changes to the sun jdk, and improving it where > > we can -- *NOT* the language, but the JDK. > > After re-reading his message, he did not state what the "fork" would be. > So, he would have to provide clarification himself. > > But I thought, his idea was, "because Java 2 is under SCSL ... lets try to > come up with a very 'Java 2-like' specification and then implement a JVM, > class libraries, etc. around it". > > I admit that his message did *NOT* state that, but it is what I thought > he meant.
I felt like I was clear, but after rereading I'm not so sure. So let me see if I can be a little more clear. Sun has a number of different products and components that they distribute under the brand "Java". Some components of this product suite are distributed under fairly reasonable licenses that allow reimplementation and some are distributed under more restrictive licenses. Recently, Sun has begun to release progressively more critical components under a new license (SCSL) which is not only incompatible with free software but is even dangerous to the ability to produce it. The fact that their newest and most important APIs are released under this license, combined with the considerable marketing firepower they have put behind it, lead me to believe that it is not an isolated phenomena but a strategy. The SCSL is Sun's strategy for the future of the Java platform. Suprisingly, Sun has been so effective in their process of marketing Java that normally rational people who believe in the concept of open standards have become absolutely convinced that the Java language should be controlled almost absolutely by a single corporate entity. This is certainly far more frightening than the Windows problem. If Sun succeeds in their attempt to overthrow the Win32 API with Java then we will be left with a system that is not only controlled completely by a corporation but is also distributed under licensing terms that make implementing a free alternative impossible. So, the concept I am suggesting is this. That we clone those interfaces that are not covered under the SCSL (which has mostly been done, even to the point of Java 1.2), but that we attempt to develop usable alternatives (forks) of those technologies which are available exclusively under the SCSL (such as Jini). I think that it would also be intelligent to fork some APIs where Sun has obviously forked a pre-existing standard in their own selfish interest, OpenGL being an obvious example. Why will this convince Sun to back off of the SCSL? Well, if you publicize the fact that the SCSL is bad but don't offer an alternative then you leave companies with nowhere to turn. However, if you publicize the problems with the SCSL and then outline a strategy for working around those problems you give people something that they can act on. Beyond this, if you can provide an alternative with useful features beyond what Sun has provided you may have a real chance of creating some market pressure on Sun to do the Right Thing(tm). So, that is what I am thinking and believe me I have good reason to think about it. I have implemented numerous large scale systems for customers in Java since before 1.0.2. I deployed commercial systems running on Servlets when it was still "Jeeves" and I had to use Jef Poskanzer's Acme.Serve because Sun wouldn't allow the use of their beta code in a production effort. I'm not just a Java newbie who is hoping to wrinkle Sun's nose. I have personally conversed with John Gage, Bill Joy and Scott McNeally on these and other free software related issues and I will tell you that we are not their priority. The only reason that they give free software any respect at all is because it has become apparent that the community can make them feel pain when they get in our way. You need to analyze what is going on with the SCSL, because it is a strategy to deprive us of our freedom. -- ___________________________________________________________________ Ean Schuessler An oderless programmer work-a-like Novare International Inc. Silent and motionless --- Some or all of the above signature may be a joke
