On 26.09.2016 05:50, GREGG WONDERLY wrote:
What’s odd, is that you are still trying to block access to reflective
access to the “open JDK”.
If it’s really open
The term "open" in the context of community names typically refers to open source, as defined by the Open Source Definition, which can be found online at https://opensource.org/osd . You can find the open source licensing information for OpenJDK at http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ .
why do we need to block access, hide details and otherwise obfuscate access details?
A software licensing choice expressed by the use of the term "open" in the context of a software development community name typically does not determine the architecture (or any other properties or qualities) of software produced by such communities, aside from the aforementioned choice.
cheers, dalibor topic -- <http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961 <tel:+491737185961> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Kühnehöfe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603 Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
