Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 31st May 2006 17:56 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Permalink for comment 129372
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-05-26
LGPL could work for Java, as long as Sun could figure out a method to ensure that only 100% compatible Java VM and library implementations are distributed. If Sun couldn't assure a user that the Java VM and libraries that they're using are certified as 100% compatible, then their "Write Once Run Anywhere" claim would no longer be valid, and that could cause them all sorts of nightmares. Perhaps they could implement a method to notify users "Yes, this implementation is conformant" or "No, this implementation is not recognized as 100% compatible" by having a test application that takes an MD5 check of the binaries and libraries and checks with the Sun website to see if it is recognized as conformant.
There may well be problems with doing what I've stated above, but as soon as Sun allows full redistribution of their source code, this is an issue that must be addressed, or they have invited the distinct possibility of incompatible versions of Java by accident that Microsoft attempted to do on purpose.
Here's another point: someone somewhere has to do a lot of testing with validation suites to verify if an implementation is conformant or not: who gets to do that, and what is the price for that? That isn't without financial costs, and someone has to absorb that cost. Even if the source code is made fully available, the "Free as in beer" doesn't mean that "It's free as in beer and also in cost for validation" at the same time, and it benefits everyone to know for sure that any and all implementations of the Java VM and libraries are compatible for a given version number, especially since that's one of the biggest benefits claimed for Java. If it were one of many other programming languages, it might not matter as much: for example, there are a lot of things for C/C++ that are "Left to the decision of the vendor" that can vary from one compiler vendor to another, even on the same hardware, and there are many cases where nothing is written at all that governs how a certain piece of code is supposed to work, so it's a fill-in-the-blank specification.
Unless Sun can come up with a method for ensuring that all distributions are compatible or at least ensure that no user can use an unverified copy without being very aware that it isn't certified, it may do them (and Java and those that develop for it) more harm than good to make it open source.