Linked by Andy Roberts on Thu 9th Jun 2005 20:58 UTC
Java The recent announcement from Apache regarding their plans to embark on their own J2SE implementation called Harmony has re-ignited the long-running Java/OSS debate. James "Father of Java" Gosling reacted in an unexpected way by giving a misleading view of what open source is really all about. Now that the dust has settled a little bit, it's time for an article that is not championing the cause for the relicensing of Sun's implementation under more permissive, open source terms, but simply a look at what could (and could not) happen under the open source model.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Its very simple.
by Anonymous on Sun 12th Jun 2005 11:36 UTC


I just don't understand how people can fail to grasp such simple concepts.

Personally I have great trouble understanding why SUN does not remove that clause:
"...(iii) you do not distribute additional software intended to replace any component(s) of the Software,"

This is such an ugly piece of legalese it makes my fist itch. Every time I upgrade Suns JDK my hackles are thoroughly raised again, as I have to go to their site and manually download various files, and I'm reminded of why.

This is the only piece of software on my system that cannot be freely distributed by my distribution. Several entirely proprietary, for pay, pieces of software have less restrictive terms on distributing their binaries.

No need for a freely distributable JDK? For crying out loud, from a manhour perspective, considering the number of installed JREs and JDKs, the entire development effort might be neutralized by the time saved on installs and upgrades alone!