Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re: The Licensing Picture (Score 1) 266

by hexwyrds (#34526050) Attached to: Oracle Asks Apache To Rethink Java Committee Exit

But that doesn't mean Mono isn't a trap.

I don't disagree, my post suggested MS could remedy these legitimate criticisms now, and gain much of the open source credibility that Oracle has been so ready to throw away. In other words, they didn't do it right the first time, although perhaps they tried. Adopting the critiques of the JCP and Oracle, it would be easy for them to show "see, we wouldn't do that, and we are updating our patent promise thusly ... to ensure that we cannot".

Comment: Re:the 'closed' nature of GPL? (Score 1) 266

by hexwyrds (#34524676) Attached to: Oracle Asks Apache To Rethink Java Committee Exit

... and the inability to add new restrictions to the license, al la restricting the Field of Use to General Purpose Computing devices, defined as things which aren't cellphones, netbooks etc.

You *could* get the TCK, pass it, and ship Apache Harmony as Java restricted to PC's and Servers only. The ASF choose not to.

Comment: Re:Clueless license users (Score 1) 266

by hexwyrds (#34523688) Attached to: Oracle Asks Apache To Rethink Java Committee Exit

If you wish to contribute to OpenJDK, you'll need to execute http://oss.oracle.com/oca.pdf... giving Oracle the right to relicense your code as they see fit.

Since anything not derived (apply Oracle's opinion of "derived") from OpenJDK has no free TCK license, and any TCK you pass causes you to add more restrictions than the GPL license permits... therein lies your trap. Your "Free" Java, isn't.

Comment: Re: The Licensing Picture (Score 3, Insightful) 266

by hexwyrds (#34519156) Attached to: Oracle Asks Apache To Rethink Java Committee Exit

I suspect it was neither good nor bad that Apache participated. One good outcome is a ton of AL-licensed core java code implementations, the copyrights of which are not owned by Oracle, and not under their control, easily integrated into most any OSS licensed language.

One bad outcome of the many worthwhile contributions to OpenJDK is that Oracle owns them, they are copyright assigned, and clearly Oracle is not being a good actor in adoption of that code. The whole GPLv2+classpath exception, overloaded with a bevy of patent threats and outright ownership of the code, leaves something to be desired for anyone who champions reuse.

If one were to create the Joe language tomorrow, syntactically different enough from Java and dodging Oracle's patent troves, it would be trivial to adopt all of those AL .jars and extend the language immediately. Not so with the GPLv2 OpenJDK code, forking to borrow the patents is highly suspect, and the code can never be brought up even to GPLv3 and its patent assertions without the owners/copyright holders direct consent.

I sort of view this as a massive failure to the freedom of software perpetrated by Oracle, but no less by the FSF itself, and share my sympathies with all the non-employee contributors to OpenJDK who agreed to copyright assignment. Trusting a foundation such as the FSF with your copyright is one thing, but entrusting it to a for-profit to protect your code for public reuse is a bone headed move.

Of course, all assurances were made by Sun prior to the ASF embarking on Harmony (there was no FoU considerations at that time, that was injected much later in flagrant violation of the JSPA), and prior to their contributing Tomcat to the ASF, that they were moving forwards. Staying with it prior to the Oracle acquisition was questionable, but staying long enough to determine that Sun had polluted Oracle's earlier positions *against Sun* seemed sensible enough. Now that all of this has played out, and the OSS universes of Java, OpenOffice and MySQL all implode, it seems like Apache chose just the right time to exit stage right.

Agreed that .NET is interesting, once all threats of RAND are completely stripped away. MS would be wise to revisit their patent pledges at this time and address their criticisms, it could score them some serious open source credibility in this environment. Especially if they were to contrast themselves to Oracle's JVM ownership. Perhaps the Outercurve Foundation will help to win some of the necessary assurances. Clearly much of the future of computing will exist on portable and multivendor/multi-OSS project VMs.

OMG BARBIE LINUX LOL!!1!!!! 124

Posted by Zonk
from the comes-with-ponyos dept.
tini1212 writes "LIKE OMG!! Have you guyz seen Barbie Linux!!??!?!?!? It's like totally cool! It's open source too!!! We can spend long nights patching the kernel, and look at pictures of that total hottie, Linus Torvalds!" From the site: "Making a bid for a piece of the emerging desktop Linux market, Mattel, Inc. announced the immediate availability of downloadable beta ISOs for BarbieOS 0.99, and said it hoped the final 1.0 retail version would be on store shelves in time for Christmas. The new OS was created by Mattel to power the upcoming revision of its popular B-Book line of laptops for girls between the ages of four and eleven. The original B-Book laptop, which ran a modified version of PalmOS, was a huge hit with consumers last holiday season, so much so that many stores had trouble keeping them in stock."

"I got everybody to pay up front...then I blew up their planet." "Now why didn't I think of that?" -- Post Bros. Comics

Working...