Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 02:10:23 +0930 From: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> To: shudo@computer.org Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Contributing... Message-ID: <20010826021022.A43240@misty.eyesbeyond.com> In-Reply-To: <20010825115852W.shudoh@aist.go.jp>; from shudo@computer.org on Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 11:58:52AM %2B0900 References: <3B8688AA.6956F1BD@ideasandassociates.com> <20010825115852W.shudoh@aist.go.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 25, 2001 at 11:58:52AM +0900, shudo@computer.org wrote: > I have been afraid of contamination of excellent > developers involved in FreeBSD/Java. As we know, once a > hacker sign Sun proprietary licenses, she/he can > contribute for GNU Java projects no longer. If one has > signed SCSL or the old JDK license to download the JDK > source code, she/he is not allowed to contribute to the > GCJ project, Classpath, and Mauve. Contribution to other > many Java projects like Japhar, SableVM, AromaVM and > kissme may be prohibited. As usual, I am not a lawyer, so I can't say things for sure, but I don't see why this is the case. I mean no disrespect, but why can one not contribute to GNU projects? There is certainly nothing in the SCSL which says I can't work on any other Java projects like that. Is it GNU policy? Take the Classpath project for example. There is precisely one modified .java file and one new .java file in the 1.3.1 patches. Not only do the .java files not need modification but they come with the binary distribution in src.jar anyway, so any contamination is then surely felt by anyone using the binary distribution too. The situation for Mauve is even better, as Sun do not release the TCK under the SCSL license (so I don't see how there can be contamination for another test suite). As for GCJ and the other VMs, that may be a different story, although since there is nothing in the SCSL which prevents me from working on them I would have thought it was fine, as long as I obviously don't use any copyrighted code from Sun. > I have no idea about such a prohibision of > contribution. But the contamination by proprietary > licenses is a real problem. > > In Linux case, binary distributions of the recent JDKs > are released by the Blackdown porting team. So even if > the Blackdown team is polluted, users can use the binary > releases without the pollution. > > But, the current efforts around FreeBSD/Java is > polluting many excellent hackers with Sun's licenses. I > have been anxious for this situation. I hope binary > distributions strongly in order to prevent the spread of > the contamination. > > I hope you examine the contamination if you download the > source code. Two other comments I have about this: 1. For production work, especially work involving features in 1.2 and 1.3 and 1.4 especially, there is no free alternative that is currently up to scratch. Obviously this will not always be the case, but from a pragmatic point of view, a working Sun JDK is probably easier to achieve than bringing everything else up to the current standard. 2. All of these free alternatives must be tested and compared against the standard, which is currently the Sun JDK, whether we like that or not. Without a working JDK on FreeBSD how to we measure how well the free projects work? How can I say "My new JIT works as well as HotSpot" if HotSpot itself does not work? Do not get me wrong, I'd love to see more people working on the free Java projects, more power to them. I'd also love to see Sun release the JDK under a BSD license (or even GPL). But mostly I want a working JDK on FreeBSD so I can do my Java work there, and the path of least resistance seems to be porting the Sun JDK. -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Phone : (801) 765 1887 Information Technology Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010826021022.A43240>