Here is the original source, I suppose: http://www.docjar.com/html/api/sun/security/provider/certpath/PolicyNodeImpl.java.html
It's not Hungarian notation, just using 'm' to prefix fields. -- Cédric On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 7:42 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks for finding that article, Fabrizio. > > Here's a twist: I can't recall OpenJDK code ever using hungarian > notation, whereas android code definitely does. I have no idea where > PolicyNodeImpl.java is in the OpenJDK sources, I couldn't find it > (god, the hg web interface sucks). So, where's that from? Did Oracle > rename the variable names in addition to aligning the spacing? It's > somewhat hard to fathom that Apache would make such a mistake. > > But, if true (and while the difference does increase if you read > further in, its undeniable that these are eerily similar to each > other), this would indicate an extremely interesting legal test of > open source principles. > > What if the code in question was committed by Apache Harmony and > Google merely copied it - is it Google that's responsible for such a > thing? What does the BSD license even say about such things? A > thousand more questions spring to mind. > > Here's a (shockingly biased) writeup by groklaw which is separate from > this copyright claim but involves Oracle trying to make the judge > throw out Google's documentation of Oracle's 180 on the FOU clause: > http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101027113123225 - which > might also be relevant here. > > Pertinent information in case you never heard / forgot: Oracle is not > using its in-house lawyers to fight this case; it is using the > services of Boies Schiller. The guys who completely FUBARed the Sco v. > Novell case. > > On Oct 28, 4:01 pm, Fabrizio Giudici <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 10/28/2010 03:50 PM, Fabrizio Giudici wrote: > > > > > So, they are not talking (only) of implementing the specs, but of code > > > being _directly_ copied. I'd be deeply surprised by that, because it > > > would have been a blatant error by Apache, which I think is very > > > competent and careful about this sort of issues. OTOH, it's hard for > > > me to imagine that Oracle uses a blatantly useless weapon, furthermore > > > as part of an escalation (I mean, it's not that patent claims have > > > been dismissed yet and they have to desperately resort to another > thing). > > > > Here it's a sample of the alleged evidences by Oracle: > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/oracle-says-google-directly-copied-java...http://www.scribd.com/doc/40316099/orclgoogcode > > > > -- > > f.g. > > -- > 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]<javaposse%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > -- 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.
