The specific thing I was replying to was "What guarantee do you have that the fork will be maintained, that bugs will get fixed, that new features will be implemented, that performance will keep improving, etc...? " which seems to indicate you think the language the company is using does need a steward.
On Oct 8, 12:18 pm, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Nick Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Isn't the whole point of a fork that people don't trust Oracle to be a > > good steward of the language? > > I don't think so, Java doesn't need a steward and actually, hasn't had one > for a while (Sun stopped doing that a while ago). > > Java lives on by itself, carried by the likes of (formerly known as) BEA, > IBM, Android and a thriving open source and commercial ecosystem. Even if > all development on Java stopped today, it would continue to be the platform > of choice for industrial development for at least the next five years. > > -- > Cédric -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
