The current issue of the JavaRanch Journal has an article by Marcus Green about GPL Java. You can check it out here, and if you have comments or question, feel free to post them in this thread.
However if push comes to shove a big organisation like IBM has a greater comfort zone with the GPL and less reliance on the goodwill of Sun.
Reading this article i am curious to know-
1.whats going on between SUN and IBM? 2.why author mentioned that java may no longer be shiny new technology?
Campbell Ritchie
Sheriff
Joined: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 32654
4
posted
0
Java is now established technology.
But what if the platform fragments? Do we want different people designing UlfJava and CampbellJava? That is what is happening in the Eiffel world; they can't get concurrency to work on the original designers' platform so there are at least other two platforms to support Eiffel concurrency. If there are so many different versions, it will mess up portability and make it difficult for anybody to use the language at all.
CR
Nicholas Jordan
Ranch Hand
Joined: Sep 17, 2006
Posts: 1282
posted
0
1. Whats going on between SUN and IBM?
2.Why author mentioned that java may no longer be shiny new technology?
Question two: It's subtle, and requires thought: If it is still working after all these years, then the underlying quality must be good. That translates easier than what the author stated.
As for my comments on the issue, GPL watches copyright issues better than some other camps. Avoiding questions rasied by the s.c.o. case would be critical in long term review. The Sun/Java license looks to me like it was written by someone who works for a commercial concern. Placing authority in a totally de-centralized command architecture may result in chaotics of healthy growth being suppressed by copyright issues being lost in the Fog of War that is an inevitable arena of use.
A copyright gives the owner the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, perform, display, or license his work. See � 106 of the act. The owner also receives the exclusive right to produce or license derivatives of his or her work. See � 201(d) of the act. Limited exceptions to this exclusivity exist for types of "fair use", such as book reviews. See � 107 of the act. To be covered by copyright a work must be original and in a concrete "medium of expression." See � 102 of the act. Under current law, works are covered whether or not a copyright notice is attached and whether or not the work is registered.
Employing the GNU licenese would insure that the copyright is free of attachment to other licensing issues in DMCA such as closed technology platforms, but would drive away some beginners who would like to protect their sources and do not have the skills to negotiate code-signing and begin to sweat in fear, uncertainty and dread when they realize the GNU license would force them to release their sources.
I suggest are review of the matter and drafts for discussion providing for the needs and wishes of a coder who is willing to share code in discussions - but is not of sufficient skills to realize that the algorithm does not have to be protected, only the keys.
Note snake-oil-faq.html is written by masters who wrote much of the code we use in Java:
Jeremey Barrett
Steven M. Bellovin
Matt Blaze
Bo D�mstedt
Gary Ellison
Larry Kilgallen
Dutra Lacerda
Felix Lee
Colin Plumb
Jim Ray
Terry Ritter
Robert Rothenburg
Adam Shostack
Rick Smith
Randall Williams
[ September 16, 2007: Message edited by: Nicholas Jordan ]
"The differential equations that describe dynamic interactions of power generators are similar to that of the gravitational interplay among celestial bodies, which is chaotic in nature."
I agree. Here's the link: http://ej-technologies/jprofiler - if it wasn't for jprofiler, we would need to
run our stuff on 16 servers instead of 3.
0
