|
|
YOUR FEEDBACK
Did you read today's front page stories & breaking news?
SOA World Conference
Virtualization Conference $200 Savings Expire May 16, 2008... – Register Today!
SYS-CON.TV |
TOP THREE LINKS YOU MUST CLICK ON Open-Sourcing Java
Flashback to '04: Gosling Says "Open-Sourcing Java Could Promote Interoperability"
Disparate Groups Would Find It Easiet to Align Behind One Code Base
By: Jeremy Geelan
May. 4, 2006 02:15 AM
Digg This!
"There's been a lot of churn lately over open letters from IBM and others calling for Sun to open source Java," wrote James Gosling last week in his java.net blog. "Rather than try to respond to everyone individually, I'll try to respond to a pile of questions here," he continues. 1. "Some have asked why IBM is sending open letters, rather than talking to us directly: asking if this isn't rather kindergarten-ish."Gosling's answer: Well, yes: it does appear that way.
2. "Some have asked what IBM would get if Java were open-sourced: doesn't IBM already have the source?"Gosling's answer: Again yes, they do have the source. It's also true that anyone can get the source. The major restriction is that if folks want to redistrubute their changes, they have to pass the test suite. Which means that about the only thing that they could get from liberalization is to be able to skip testing.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TinyAcorns-MightyOaks
wrote: JAG is the Java
authority within Sun,
perhaps THE Java
authority anywhere on
earth. But what do the
others behind the Oak
Project all those years
ago think about the
open-sourcing of Java:
has anyone asked Arthur
Van Hoff or Andy
Bechtolsheim? read & respond » |
JavaDan3 wrote: Isn't
Gosling in Tokyo? Or
South Africa? Or in Outer
Space (Java runs the Mars
Explorer)? How can he be
joining this debate? Is
he, like Java, now
everywhere? "Gosling
Everwhere" - I like it. read & respond » |
Peter van der Linden
wrote: OK, thanks for the
reasons why people would
like Java GPL''d.
That first one about "not
being able to ship with
Linux" would be a serious
problem, if it were
accurate. However, as
Nathar showed, 2 big
distros currently ship
Java without problems.
As another example,
Lindows shows
how Linux can ship
without 100% gpl''d code.
The second point about
Sun squashing new stuff
puzzles me. What is
wrong with the Java
Community Process? Of
course Sun is going to
safeguard Java from ideas
that will spoil it, such
as destroying the ability
to run on all
architectures. However,
compiling Swing (or any
part of the run-time) to
native seems like a
pretty good idea to me.
That can be done
regardless of whether or
not Java is GPL''d.
After all, you have all
the source.
Looking at the code
taints you? ... read & respond » |
Nathar Leichoz wrote: [i]
Problems solved by the
GPL (as such)
a) Java can''''t be
distributed as part of a
Linux distribution unless
it''''s bundled with
every application that
uses it. Also it would be
illegal to distribute GCC
in this circumstance.
[/i]
Redhat ships Java
http://www.redhat.com/sof
tware/rhel/features/
Slackware ships Java
http://www.slackware.com/
pb/?vers=slackware-9.1&se
t=d read & respond » |
Those Who Dont Remember
History wrote: Lest you
forget, Sun has quite a
history of open letters:
These pre-date IBM's letter. read & respond » |
Andrew Shuttlewood wrote:
Problems solved by the
GPL (as such)
a) Java can''t be
distributed as part of a
Linux distribution unless
it''s bundled with every
application that uses it.
Also it would be illegal
to distribute GCC in this
circumstance.
b) Sun can squash
attempts to do new and
interesting stuff with
Java, such as ahead of
time compilation (note
how you can''t compile
swing using java to
native code, even off
companies that OWN a
license)
c) You can''t
redistribute what there
is in the source. Even
looking at it taints you
from developing similar
code.
People don''t want to
hack on the Java standard
API because it''s under
so many layers of
restrictions, it''s
certainly not open source
in any means - it is
purely source available.
If Sun want to do
''something'' that would
be good, then they could
open sourc... read & respond » |
Jason Bell wrote: Alan
Williamson, Jason Briggs
and myself had this very
same discussion during
October/November 2002.
It can be only summed up
by the following link:
http://www.n-ary.com/java
/cartoons.cfm?ID=18
(I''m
the one in the orange top
:))
Regards
Jason Bell read & respond » |
akme wrote: Sun and IBM
are just acting according
to their organizational
character. While they
both promote innovation,
Sun promotes its
individual leaders while
IBM promotes its
collective action
(creative,
committee-forming Borg).
While Java is open-source
the JDK/API standards and
management thereof are in
Sun''s control, and
that''s where IBM would
like more of a partner
role on equal footing for
management of the API.
Management by committee
is always slower than by
a single leader but
running JCP has already
opened that issue. The
statement about
"increasing marketplace
acceptance of Java" is
ridiculous -- Java is
already the standard
choice for most non-MS
development unless you
need the power of
C/Objective-C/C++ or you
find value in other
langusges such as Python.
While Java was invented
by people at Su... read & respond » |
Peter van der Linden
wrote: There''s a lot of
sound and fury around
this issue. But no one
has yet given a
convincing answer to the
question "what problem is
solved by putting Java
under the GPL?" So, what
problem would that solve?
Every Java compiler kit
already comes with the
complete source code for
the run-time library, so
you can fix all the bugs
you want. So what''s
stopping you?
I don''t understand the
suggestion that
open-sourcing Java would
be somehow a "response to
Mono". What specifically
would happen, that cannot
happen today? The Mono
project is doomed.
Either it fizzles out on
its own like most open
source projects, or it
becomes wildly successful
and Microsoft kills it
either by enforcing its
patents or by bribing the
developement team to
join Microsoft (as they
did with Borland and
Anders Heljberg).... read & respond » |
jshore wrote: Sun
doesn''t get it. Neither
do the most vocal open
source advocates. The
main reason why Java
needs to be open sourced
is not about "freedom",
but rather that the
community at large
finally has the ability
to move Java along: fix
problems and make it
competitive with the .NET
platform environment.
Java has largely
stagnated as a language
and an environment:
- fundamental libraries a
mess
- java plugin /
applet ceded market
dominance to flash
- UI implementation buggy
and backward
It took the .NET threat
for Sun to get off their
butt. Still, the
environment. Fact is,
Java is a losing
proposition in Sun''s
hands. They''ve shown
over the years that they
are poor caretakers. read & respond » |
PCM2 wrote: I think --
and I''m really serious
-- Sun should probably be
looking at open sourcing
Java as a response to
Mono, if for no other
reason.
Miguel and Ximian took a
look at Java and decided
it didn''t suit their
needs, as far as
developing rich desktop
applications for Linux
(e.g. Evolution). So
rather than use Java,
they decided it was
actually better to
implement the .Net
environment themselves,
from scratch. To me, that
sounds like a fairly
heavy indictment, and one
that Sun should be
looking into, if they''re
smart.
Now you''ve got Mono
humming right along, with
the developers busy
implementing two distinct
stacks: One that''s a
Microsoft compatibility
layer, for using all the
stuff you might have
written with Visual
Studio, and another
that''s more
Linux-oriented, with
GNOME and GTK bindings,
Linux p... read & respond » |
The Java Trap wrote:
Gosling also says "even
more open-source than it
is already"... but Java isn''t open
source at all
according to RMS read & respond » |
spellraiser wrote:
Question from the
article:
2. "Some have
asked what IBM would get
if Java were
open-sourced: doesn''t
IBM already have the
source?"
Gosling''s answer:
Again yes, they do have
the source. It''s also
true that anyone can get
the source. The major
restriction is that if
folks want to
redistrubute their
changes, they have to
pass the test suite.
Which means that about
the only thing that they
could get from
liberalization is to be
able to skip testing.
So it doesn''t seem to be
such a big issue after
all. The source is
already available, and
all that is required to
change it and
redistribute it is to
pass a standard suite of
tests. Now, call me
crazy, but I think
that''s not A Bad Thing.
This restriction is what
helps Java to be uniform
and platform-independent.
The be... read & respond » |
WorthNoting wrote:
Gosling is the one who
produced the first
non-free version of
emacs, which was a direct
motivation for RMS to
produce the GPL!
He also produced NeWS
which was superior to X
in almost every way...
except... it wasn''t open
either!
I''ve always thought that
Java will become open
source over Gosling''s
cold dead body, but maybe
he''ll prove me wrong. read & respond » |
Actually wrote: By
definition Gosling is not
the father of Java. He
was (and still is) a Sun
employee and developed
Java during that time, by
today standards any
product developed by an
employee is property of
the company, so even
McNealy is the father,
McNealy is just the
obnoxious uncle that says
weird things when is
drunk.
Gosling was just a
surrogate father.
BTW what happened to the
other people around OAK
project?, did sun killed
all of them and throwed
them into a ditch?. read & respond » |
NZHeretic wrote: As I
said over at Slashdot it
would benefit the entire
Java based industy,
including the free
software, open source and
proprietary based
vendors, to open license
the core J2ME,J2SE,J2EE
libraries and Java to
bytecode compilers.
Java''s primary strength,
the ability to write code
which is constantly
portable across many
vendors platforms, would
be greatly enhanced if
all of vendors were using
the same core libraries.
To insure that the
standard base core would
not become polluted with
incompatable forks, the
source could be licensed
with a clause requiring
any incompatable changes
or any additional classes
or methords to be moved
to and occupy only the
vendors namespace.
Another clause would
require that the vendor
version of Java bytecode
compiler and any GUI IDE
defaults to generating
portable bytecod... read & respond » |
Quezztion wrote: How will
opening Java help Sun
make more money? read & respond » |
java/jvm wrote: I don''t
think everyone
understands java. Port
the thing lately, and I
think you will
understand. A bit more
input from the
"community" needs to help
evolve the black box. It
doesn''t matter at that
point if it''s sun, or
the community. What does
matter, is Sun has put a
lot of resources into
Java. Get involved, port
the thing, then give
input. read & respond » |
Chris Hubick wrote: I am
still waiting for Mr.
Goslings comments to
reflect some insight as
to why thousands and
thousands of developers
believe in many of the
ideals behind the Free
Software Foundation. He
either doesn''t
understand /why/ Sun is
being pushed - or just
doesn''t want to tackle
any philosophical or
pragmatic issues of
Freedom. read & respond » |
goslingsamoron wrote: How
ironic... all his
carefully chosen
questions and answers
seem to be nothing more
than "kindergarten-ish"
indirect attacks on IBM. read & respond » |
Virtualization Journal
Attracts JavaOne
Attendees to SYS-CON
Media Booth Virtualization Journal
now reaches more than
60,000 online readers
with monthly digital
editions and weekly
newsletters. The premier
issue of the magazine's
print edition, which
debuts on May 6, 2008, at
JavaOne in San Francisco,
as a media sponsor of
this event, will be
availabl |
Real-Time Kaazing
Solution and Sun's
Glassfish Forge RIA
Alliance Kaazing Corporation and
Sun Microsystems
announced an alliance to
deliver the scalable and
advanced real-time Web
2.0 platform. The
integration between
Kaazing's real-time Rich
Internet Application
(RIA) solution,
Enterprise Comet, and Sun
Microsystems' open source
Java EE applic |
Sun Challenges Linux Sun's mule train has
finally pulled into
Indiana after three years
on the road. Indiana is
the Linux-friendly
Fedora-like OpenSolaris
project meant to move the
Solaris-shy Linux
community off Linux and
on to Solaris tempted by
Solaris widgetry like the
highly scalable,
rollback-e |
AJAX World - Sun Talks Up
its Late-to-the-Party
AIR-Silverlight Rival At Java One this week Sun
has been selling its year
-old-but-still-upcoming -
and definitely
late-to-the-party - Adobe
AIR- and Microsoft
Silverlight-competitive
JavaFX Rich Client
environment as a
potential
revenue-generator capable
of putting ads on mobile
applications and JavaF |
MySQL Backs Off Closed
Source Plan MySQL has backed off a
plan to charge for some
encryption and
compression backup
widgetry in the next
version of the database -
and, heavens, NOT OPEN
SOURCE THE STUFF, an idea
it trotted a few weeks
ago and predictably
caught hell for. Sun,
which bought MySQL for a
billion dolla |
JavaOne Archives - Dvorak
Comments on AMD Intel
Lawsuit on SYS-CON.TV Conference in San
Francisco. Dvorak held
forth on a number of
topics, including the new
AMD/Intel lawsuit, the
viability of Java and
Sun, the value of (or
lack thereof) of
corporate PR, and whether
or not a new book about
Silicon Valley is really
worth reading. |
Click to Add our RSS Feeds to the Service of Your Choice:
![]()
View Additional SYS-CON Feeds
|
Day Software to Present
at Henry Stewart DAM Show Day Software (SWX:DAYN)
(OTCQX:DYIHY), a leading
provider of global
content management
May. 9, 2008 04:00 PM |