On Monday, February 13, 2017, Brice Dutheil <brice.duth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Android battle is another thing that I wouldn't consider for OracleJDK > / OpenJDK. > While I do like what Google did from a technical point of view, Google may > have overstepped fair use (or not – I don't know). Anyway Sun didn't like > what Google did, they probably considered going to court at that time. > > > > > -- Brice > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:20 AM, kurt greaves <k...@instaclustr.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','k...@instaclustr.com');>> wrote: > >> are people actually trying to imply that Google is less evil than oracle? >> what is this shill fest >> >> >> On 12 Feb. 2017 8:24 am, "Kant Kodali" <k...@peernova.com >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','k...@peernova.com');>> wrote: >> >> Saw this one today... >> >> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13624062 >> >> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:27 AM, Eric Evans <john.eric.ev...@gmail.com >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','john.eric.ev...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','edlinuxg...@gmail.com');>> wrote: >>> > Lets be clear: >>> > What I am saying is avoiding being loose with the word "free" >>> > >>> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license >>> > >>> > Many things with the JVM are free too. Most importantly it is free to >>> use. >>> > >>> > https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/distribution.xml >>> > >>> > As it relates to this conversation: I am not aware of anyone running >>> > Cassandra that has modified upstream JVM to make Cassandra run >>> > better/differently *. Thus the license around the Oracle JVM is roughly >>> > meaningless to the user/developer of cassandra. >>> > >>> > * The only group I know that took an action to modify upstream was >>> Acunu. >>> > They had released a modified Linux Kernel with a modified Apache >>> Cassandra. >>> > http://cloudtweaks.com/2011/02/data-storage-startup-acunu-ra >>> ises-3-6-million-to-launch-its-first-product/. >>> > That product no longer exists. >>> > >>> > "I don't how to read any of this. It sounds like you're saying that a >>> > JVM is something that cannot be produced as a Free Software project," >>> > >>> > What I am saying is something like the JVM "could" be produced as a >>> "free >>> > software project". However, the argument that I was making is that the >>> > popular viable languages/(including vms or runtime to use them) today >>> > including Java, C#, Go, Swift are developed by the largest tech >>> companies in >>> > the world, and as such I do believe a platform would be viable. >>> Specifically >>> > I believe without Oracle driving Java OpenJDK would not be viable. >>> > >>> > There are two specific reasons. >>> > 1) I do not see large costly multi-year initiatives like G1 happening >>> > 2) Without guidance/leadership that sun/oracle I do not see new >>> features >>> > that change the language like lambda's and try multi-catch happening >>> in a >>> > sane way. >>> > >>> > I expanded upon #2 be discussing my experience with standards like c++ >>> 11, >>> > 14,17 and attempting to take compiling working lambda code on linux >>> GCC to >>> > microsoft visual studio and having it not compile. In my opinion, Java >>> only >>> > wins because as a platform it is very portable as both source and >>> binary >>> > code. Without leadership on that front I believe that over time the >>> language >>> > would suffer. >>> >>> I realize that you're trying to be pragmatic about all of this, but >>> what I don't think you realize, is that so am I. >>> >>> Java could change hands at any time (it has once already), or Oracle >>> leadership could decide to go in a different direction. Imagine for >>> example that they relicensed it to exclude use by orientation or >>> religion, Cassandra would implicitly carry these restrictions as well. >>> Imagine that they decided to provide a back-door to the NSA, Cassandra >>> would then also contain such a back-door. These might sound >>> hypothetical, but there is plenty of precedent here. >>> >>> OpenJDK benefits from the same resources and leadership from Oracle >>> that you value, but is licensed and distributed in a way that >>> safeguards us from a day when Oracle becomes less benevolent, (if that >>> were to happen, some other giant company could assume the mantle of >>> leadership). >>> >>> All I'm really suggesting is that we at least soften our requirement >>> on the Oracle JVM, and perhaps perform some test runs in CI against >>> OpenJDK. Actively discouraging people from using the Free Software >>> alternative here, one that is working well for many, isn't the >>> behavior I'd normally expect from a Free Software project. >>> >>> -- >>> Eric Evans >>> john.eric.ev...@gmail.com >>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','john.eric.ev...@gmail.com');> >>> >> >> >> > https://www.google.com/amp/gizmodo.com/5941817/what-really-made-steve-jobs-so-angry-about-google/amp Steve jobs too believes google stole from him. Anyway the other alernative pull a sylacca and re write in c. Then we have no jvm overlords -- Sorry this was sent from mobile. Will do less grammar and spell check than usual.
