On 10 November 2010 11:15, Fabrizio Giudici <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 11/09/2010 10:58 PM, Stuart McCulloch wrote: > >> >> bogus logic - there are people who invent and promote defence systems, but >> that doesn't mean they're personally ready to declare war on someone >> >> I don't take this. Apache, like FSF, is the inventor and promoter of a >> licensing scheme that implies legal protection. Thus, I assume that they are >> perfectly equipped for lawsuits (and since the question arose from the old >> Sun times, they could sue Sun in a moment of weakness). >> > You seem not to understand what is a Software Foundation, such as FSF or > ASF. It's a bunch of people that, beyond producing code, also design > licenses and promotes them. Ok? Now, designing a license is a matter of > lawyers, not engineers. Any software foundation that proposed a license > model and wasn't able to defend it in court would be just laughable. FSF and > ASF are not. Sigh... it's the difference between theory and practice. Just because someone develops a license doesn't necessarily mean they are best placed to prosecute in court. Sure they could be called as an expert witness on that particular license, but that doesn't make them prosecutors - not all lawyers are equal! (or in other words... who's better at flying a plane, the person who designed it or a pilot?) Besides wouldn't a lawsuit about the TCK be about other matters, not the ASL specifically? Anyway, back to the topic - personally I think if Oracle truly wanted to maintain compatibility and avoid forks then they'd be pushing the TCK to anyone who wanted it, then everyone could make sure a particular JDK was compliant. By limiting availability of the TCK and forcing everyone to branch from the GPL'd OpenJDK they seem to be limiting competition*. How can it be truly open if I'm forced to start from a particular codebase - what if I have a great idea that involved a massive rewrite of certain areas (which might break the 'derived' nature) but would still be compatible? (* of course another reason might be that the actual TCK is completely useless and doesn't test conformance very well, hence the need for a common base) -- > Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager > Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." > java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people > [email protected] > > -- > 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. > > -- Cheers, Stuart -- 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.
