You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to community@apache.org by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org> on 2004/03/18 14:16:14 UTC
Apache should join the open source java discussion
Something big is stirring in the java world. There's talks between Sun
and IBM about releasing an open source version of java. There's talks
between the linux desktop movers about adopting java as the glue that
binds the major desktop projects together.
Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
Apache is one of the biggest open source communities, and the leader of
the pack when it comes to open source java.
I think the Apache community should work together on an open letter to
Sun, IBM, and the rest of the open source community stating our shared
position on the subject. Like Havoc Pennington writes
(http://ometer.com/desktop-language.html), the "Community Should Decide"
and "It's time to start the discussion".
WDYT?
--
cheers,
- Leo Simons
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
IoC Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/
Articles & Opinions -- http://articles.leosimons.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but
people wouldn't obey the rules."
-- Alan Bennett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Serge Knystautas dijo:
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>> I see many wrong here. Just to refresh the mind:
>>
>> http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-225523.html
>> http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-227105.html
>> http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-251401.html
>
> At the core of these discussions is that Microsoft wanted to make it
> easier to control ActiveX components from within Java, and Sun wanted
> keep Java OS-neutral. When I evaluated Sun (JNI) and MS's (JDirect)
> proposals, I thought MS has a better one. And I think there's a
> cause-effect relationship between Sun's stance of keeping OS-neutral and
> Java losing the desktop.
But ActiveX implementation not exists in Linux, OS-X, etc.
Other OSes has another special features. Part of the power of Java is that
you are able to compile it (in any OS) and run it in any OS. But if you
start using some features locked to an specific OS, then you start to lose
that.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> I see many wrong here. Just to refresh the mind:
>
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-225523.html
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-227105.html
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-251401.html
At the core of these discussions is that Microsoft wanted to make it
easier to control ActiveX components from within Java, and Sun wanted
keep Java OS-neutral. When I evaluated Sun (JNI) and MS's (JDirect)
proposals, I thought MS has a better one. And I think there's a
cause-effect relationship between Sun's stance of keeping OS-neutral and
Java losing the desktop.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <an...@apache.org>.
Serge Knystautas dijo:
> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>> ie: MS can see the forking as a way to break the Java platform. They
>> already tried to make it some years ago and failed. But make some harm.
>> Even Sun sued them for this.
>>
>> The scenario is not easy:
>>
>> If Java is divided, we lose.
>
> I respectfully disagree. I think (some of) what Microsoft did with Java
> was good. In the long-run it may have hurt Java, but they dropped out
> before there were any problems.
>
> Two points:
>
> 1. Early on, Microsoft wrote a much better JVM implementation. The
> Microsoft JVM 1.1 was much faster than Sun's win32 implementation at the
> time. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I see many wrong here. Just to refresh the mind:
http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-225523.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-227105.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1001_3-251401.html
> 2. IMHO JDirect is better than JNI. JNI allows for 100% Java purity,
> but in the meantime Java is 7 years old, and it's still a huge pain to
> use ActiveX components. Python gets to be as the best glueware tool. I
> don't care about losing to C#... we're losing more ground to Python.
I care about losing in favor of C#, then wil come .NET and after that
XAML. It is something we need to care.
>
>> By doing a potential Java forking, MS can take advantage and make C#
>> win.
>> But, if Java is licensed under GPL it will be hard to make an
>> intentional
>> fork at all.
>>
>> My ideas are posted in my too primitive english. I hope the point is
>> clear
>> now.
>
> I think they come across well. I'm just in the camp that more
> competition is better, and that's why I like ASF licensing since it
> allows for more competition.
Note, if I will not like the ASF License, I will not been here. ;-)
I am in the camp where more FAIR competition is better.
This is why we need to leverage a player camp without a potential
one-vendor lock-in. Under this schema, Linux serves well to this purpose
and Java is the other key piece of this player camp.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Santiago Gala wrote:
> In the client side, I saw a comment about modern Flash apps (more and
> more common), which said something like: "Those Flash apps are like what
> java Applets should have been".
+1. We ported a collection of casino games we'd written in applets into
Flash 5 movies, and Flash was much easier and more capable. Debugging
was an incredible pain for me who's used to hard exceptions in Java
(Actionscript is like Javascript, where if you make a mistake it often
just ignores the buggy line).
Then throw in Flash communication server (Actionscript on the server).
Within a few hours of reading about the Flash video API, I had a motion
sensing video camera that would could fire a SOAP call and store an mpeg
movie whenever someone entered our offices.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Santiago Gala <sg...@hisitech.com>.
El viernes, 19 marz, 2004, a las 05:16 Europe/Madrid, Serge Knystautas
escribió:
> still a huge pain to use ActiveX components. Python gets to be as the
> best glueware tool. I don't care about losing to C#... we're losing
> more ground to Python.
>
In the client side, I saw a comment about modern Flash apps (more and
more common), which said something like: "Those Flash apps are like
what java Applets should have been".
Also, Ben Hyde compares Flash with Hypercard, in the sense of
non-programmer programming language:
http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/000533.html#000533
While python is getting momentum for scripting in the server side,
flash is what is substituting java in the client side (while cellular
games are done in java, flash is beginning to get installed into phones
too).
As a conclusion, I would say that the "One language to rule them all"
times are gone. Wire protocols and networking make much easier to use
different languages for parts of systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> ie: MS can see the forking as a way to break the Java platform. They
> already tried to make it some years ago and failed. But make some harm.
> Even Sun sued them for this.
>
> The scenario is not easy:
>
> If Java is divided, we lose.
I respectfully disagree. I think (some of) what Microsoft did with Java
was good. In the long-run it may have hurt Java, but they dropped out
before there were any problems.
Two points:
1. Early on, Microsoft wrote a much better JVM implementation. The
Microsoft JVM 1.1 was much faster than Sun's win32 implementation at the
time. I don't see anything wrong with that.
2. IMHO JDirect is better than JNI. JNI allows for 100% Java purity,
but in the meantime Java is 7 years old, and it's still a huge pain to
use ActiveX components. Python gets to be as the best glueware tool. I
don't care about losing to C#... we're losing more ground to Python.
> By doing a potential Java forking, MS can take advantage and make C# win.
> But, if Java is licensed under GPL it will be hard to make an intentional
> fork at all.
>
> My ideas are posted in my too primitive english. I hope the point is clear
> now.
I think they come across well. I'm just in the camp that more
competition is better, and that's why I like ASF licensing since it
allows for more competition.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >>> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <an...@apache.org>.
Noel J. Bergman dijo:
>> even the 1st releaser cannot distribute the code. If you
>> read the next sentence of the part you posted
>
> Possibly true. Either way, the patent prevents distribution by anyone else
> under the GPL. It may or may not impact the patent holder.
Thanks to the word "indirectly", the patent holder is impacted too. In the
preamble of the GPL we read:
<snip from preamble of GPL>
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or
for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You
must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you
must show them these terms so they know their rights.
</snip from preamble of GPL>
There is: "You must give the recipients all the right that you have."
This include the right to distribute the software. If I cannot give them
this right, then I broke the GPL. Don't think many lawyers are not studing
this license to find a hole. Technically, is imposible to steal the
software or make limited distributions. AFAIK, this is one of the points
where GNU people are very carefully and put there many efforts.
In short this is why often the GPL is called a viral license. Because
automatically "infect" any code you add in the software under a GPL. You
have no chance to make it diferent. It is one of the reasons why the GPL
cannot be used in any Apache project.
> Getting back to the original point, there is nothing in the GPL that
> prevents forking. It just means that others should have access to the
> code that you used in the fork.
I agree. But the point is not against the fork. The comment is against any
potential (read: intentional and forced) fork that target to harm the Java
platform. Why? Since the old Cesar's days, we know the old phrase: Divide
and conquer.
ie: MS can see the forking as a way to break the Java platform. They
already tried to make it some years ago and failed. But make some harm.
Even Sun sued them for this.
The scenario is not easy:
If Java is divided, we lose.
If Java stay under Sun, we can lose too.
The GNU people don't like KDE and prefer GNOME (even when some of them
accept KDE is better). Why? because there is a potential harm with the Qt
library. At any time the owner of the Qt lib can said: "OK, guys, thanks
for the effort and thanks for help us to distribute our Qt lib around the
world, but now we want to make big bucks. From now, we will ask a fee for
our lib". The overall work of the project will be throw away the day this
will happen.
Sound this as a crazy idea? I don't think so. See the .GIF and .MP3
lessons and we are home. In both cases the owners first said: "Hi, here is
these stuff, you can use it, is free." Later they changed the rules when
both formats were an standard in the world. I think we cannot just stay
and pray this kind of things can happen again.
By doing a potential Java forking, MS can take advantage and make C# win.
But, if Java is licensed under GPL it will be hard to make an intentional
fork at all.
My ideas are posted in my too primitive english. I hope the point is clear
now.
Also, note I am with us. I am just trying to make clear many point touched
in many places but never got released an specific politic about it.
But, back to the original point:
What to do in the case that Java goes GPL from the ASF point of view?
AFAIK, the GPL is viral and not compatible with the AL. Even (because of
the special case of Java code) the LGPL cannot be use in any ASF project.
Then what?
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Noel J. Bergman dijo:
>> > And if they do things that impinge on their own patents, the GPL
>> > says that you cannot use their code, even though it is under the GPL.
>
>> This means MS cannot do fork by using own patents and redistribute
>> without breaking the GPL license, this is the poison pill, right? ;-)
>
> The poison pill is the patent. Section 7 of the GPL says, in part:
>
> if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution
> of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or
> indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both
> it and this License would be to refrain entirely from
> distribution of the Program.
> If you release code with patent encumbrances you could release the entire
> thing under GPL, and no other developer could use it. They would still be
> forced to either license the patent, or fork and compete without the
> functionality.
Not agree because even the 1st releaser cannot distribute the code. If you
read the next sentence of the part you posted:
<snip>
For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free
redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or
indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and
this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the
Program.
</snip>
There is a very nice word: "indirectly". Suppose:
A - a patent holder.
B - Buy from A. The Software include patents from A.
C - Receives the software from B.
But with the nice word "indirectly" also C recieves the software from A.
Then A cannot distribute it. It can have his own patented for his own
internal use. It is a kind of lock-in.
BTW, I not think people on the GPL cannot saw this. Will be good to
contact them to ask about this. It is too obvious that I cannot believe
they don't include this posibility as you suggested. The poison pill is
GPL, not a patent.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Noel J. Bergman dijo:
>> A GPL-ed Java would be Microsoft's biggest nightmare. Any extensions
>> that
>> Microsoft makes will have to be made available with source code and
>> under
>> the GPL
>
> That just means that the player with the biggest marketshare can drive
> everyone else in a direction, even if they don't want to go.
Yep. The 95% of And I think we already are witness of some cases.ie: The
browser war. Now, they are installing the .NET on each machine. And what
about Java? If the ASF adopt an pasive attitude, I foresee a death of Java
in favor of C#. This also means the death of J2EE in favor of .NET. Then
the worse can happen even for the ASF.
> And if they do things that impinge on their own patents, the GPL
> says that you cannot use their code, even though it is under the GPL.
This means MS cannot do fork by using own patents and redistribute without
breaking the GPL license, this is the poison pill, right? ;-)
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Noel J. Bergman dijo:
>> If you read the open letters there is clear they suggest an full GPL
>> license, because if not maybe it can end (intentionally) in a fork.
>
> There is nothing in the GPL that talks about a fork. The argument for Sun
> to license their JVM under the GPL is that then Sun would be the only one
> who could then license that code under a proprietary license for those who
> wanted a non-GPL JVM.
I was not talking that the (L)GPL license by it self prevent the forking.
I tought about this:
<snip>
Sun's biggest fear regarding Java has been Microsoft. Microsoft has shown
in the past that it wants nothing better than to "pollute" Java and
fragment the market, but Microsoft also regards the GPL as a poison pill.
A GPL-ed Java would be Microsoft's biggest nightmare. Any extensions that
Microsoft makes will have to be made available with source code and under
the GPL, in turn. That makes it far easier to backport Microsoft's
extensions to the main trunk, if required, neutralising their power to
fork the codebase.
</snip>
Did you see why I wrote it can prevent a fork? ;-)
The full article is here:
http://linuxtoday.com/developer/2004022402326OPCYDV
> Sun very clearly does not want a fork.
I agree (see the above snip again). The word "intentional" was not
addresed to Sun at all. Remember there are other players and the game is
not only IBM vs. Sun. It is multiplayer game: ASF, XAML, .NET, Mono, Linux
Desktop, GNOME, etc.
What if Java is defeated by .NET and all the hundreds of developed hours
by ASF committer is just throw away? After .NET succes the next move is
XAML. This means the end of the Internet as we know it. In this scenario,
even the Apache HTTPD server can be defeated. We cannot allow this happen.
I think we can be proactive. For the good of the ASF.
Fortunately, I cannot put in my head many hats as many of you can do. So
in this way I have not mixed ideas or feels about this. I just have one
hat and this is my ASF committer hat. I see a posible thread that will
come as a consecuence of being passive in this issue. We are a player in
the game. This issue is in my head for a month (since on February, 16 I
read the first letter of Eric Raymond):
http://linuxtoday.com/it_management/2004021600226OPSWDV
> There was some report that Sun would be willing to turn over
> stewardship of the JCP to a neutral third party (KeyLabs has been
> mentioned), but only with mandatory TCK testing to ensure
> that all implementations were compliant. The proposed Apache JSR and TCK
> licenses also mandate compliance.
Not sure if this is enough. This move look to me as just "throwing a bone"
to shut up people that is talking about a good move than Sun can do right
now. To me the game is far more than "sharing" some revenue channels (or
as you want to see them).
Now is the momentum to make a choice. We cannot go back in time and solve
problems. I don't want to see in the future the ASF having the same end as
Novell, Borland or Netscape. This companies in the best case are just a
shadow of what they were before). The cards are on the table and we need
to decide right now what to do. Waiting and thinking can be too late. It
is a very historic moment in the Java life and I think Java is very
important to us.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> Knowing old experiences is a good way to see that it would happen:
>
> <snip>
> In 1987, three years after the success of NFS, Sun lost the war to define
> the standard graphics interface for the next generation. The winner, the X
> Window System, was technically inferior to Sun's NeWS offering. But X had
> one critical advantage; it was open source. Ten years later in 1997, when
> Bill Joy came to a Linux conference to push Jini as a universal
> network-service protocol, we in the open-source community told him
> straight up "You can have ubiquity or you can have control. Pick one." He
> picked control, and Jini failed in its promise. The contrast with NFS
> could hardly be more stark.
> </snip>
> Source: http://linuxtoday.com/it_management/2004021600226OPSWDV
Microsoft fought and lost against Apache httpd. I think there are a lot
of examples that could support this point irrespective of licensing.
> <snip>
> Using the GPL will require that all the released improved versions be free
> software. This means you can avoid the risk of having to compete with a
> proprietary modified version of your own work.
> </snip>
> Source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyUseGPL
I believe your earlier point was that open source will always win out
over proprietary. So GPL when we don't have to worry about a
proprietary fork?
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >>> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Hi William:
William A. Rowe, Jr. dijo:
> At 01:46 PM 3/18/2004, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>
>>If you read the open letters there is clear they suggest an full GPL
>>license, because if not maybe it can end (intentionally) in a fork.
> As Noel said already - GPL does not inhibit forking. The license does
> prohibit adopting the same name for a fork. If someone forks Tomcat
> (which they could do under many licenses) they could not call it Tomcat.
AFAIK, Tomcat is not under GPL. It is under AL, and that is a diferent
beast. :-D
Please read my answer to Noel.
>
> A forked Java would not be "Java" - although some "Cappuccino" fork
> could behave identically and be an improved implementation.
>
>>Forking the competence is a long know way to win a battle. The UNIX
>>history is a good example of how a BSD-style licence can end forking and
>>no-one is the winner.
>
> How do you call BSD code adopted by the GNU folks, the Microsoft folks,
> even SCO as a no-win? True it is not homogenous. But we have Linux and
> Mac OS/X - both strong OS's - neither would exist without dedicated
> personal and corporate interests. I can write nearly identical network
> code on all three, because the BSD Sockets layer was 'forked' in so many
> directions. Would we be better off with none of this? AT&T's System V
> staff might believe so.
BTW, Where is the AT&T staff now? It exists as an staff at all? Why? Where
is now the AT&T influence around the software development? Sorry, I don't
see it. AFAIK, they are selling phones stuff, right? Who win the battle?
For sure it was not AT&T.
> Forks reflect that folks disagree, and sometimes hit insurmountable
> roadblocks and obstacles. The best fork generally attracts the most
> interest, but that actually means the best supported/community/docs
> and many features beyond simply code.
Nice rethoric for an ideal world. I am aware of your point about forking.
Note, I am not telling: "forking is evil" or "I don't recognize the effort
done by other corporation and the big bucks they put on the Open Source
effort". I am not against it at all. Here we are talking about diferent
things. Is MS can fork Java they will do it and Java is death. If Java
stay just on the Sun side, then Java is death too. This is the point
behind my words.
Knowing old experiences is a good way to see that it would happen:
<snip>
In 1987, three years after the success of NFS, Sun lost the war to define
the standard graphics interface for the next generation. The winner, the X
Window System, was technically inferior to Sun's NeWS offering. But X had
one critical advantage; it was open source. Ten years later in 1997, when
Bill Joy came to a Linux conference to push Jini as a universal
network-service protocol, we in the open-source community told him
straight up "You can have ubiquity or you can have control. Pick one." He
picked control, and Jini failed in its promise. The contrast with NFS
could hardly be more stark.
</snip>
Source: http://linuxtoday.com/it_management/2004021600226OPSWDV
> A forked Java would not be "Java", could not be called "Java", and would
> succeed only if the vast majority of the huge Java community walked
> away from Sun's effort. If that happened, I'm sure such an exodus would
> have been well earned.
>
> * BSD like license - code may drift from published version,
> without being disclosed (closed source).
> Published code may be incorporated/adopted into BSD or GPL
> licensed forks/distributions.
>
> * GPL like license - code may drift from published version
> without being disclosed to parties other than recipients
> (limited disribution.)
The idea of limited distribution is not correct. You are here talking
about LGPL that is diferent of the GPL.
<snip>
Using the GPL will require that all the released improved versions be free
software. This means you can avoid the risk of having to compete with a
proprietary modified version of your own work.
</snip>
Source: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyUseGPL
Also,
<snip_from_the_GPL>
if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee,
you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make
sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show
them these terms so they know their rights.
</snip_from_the_GPL>
See: YOU MUST GIVE THE RECIPIENTS ALL THE RIGHTS THAT YOU HAVE.
I think the above sentece also apply in the case of patents.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
> Published code may only be incorporated/adopted into GPL
> licensed forks/distributions.
>
> Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
At 01:46 PM 3/18/2004, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>If you read the open letters there is clear they suggest an full GPL
>license, because if not maybe it can end (intentionally) in a fork.
As Noel said already - GPL does not inhibit forking. The license does
prohibit adopting the same name for a fork. If someone forks Tomcat
(which they could do under many licenses) they could not call it Tomcat.
A forked Java would not be "Java" - although some "Cappuccino" fork
could behave identically and be an improved implementation.
>Forking the competence is a long know way to win a battle. The UNIX
>history is a good example of how a BSD-style licence can end forking and
>no-one is the winner.
How do you call BSD code adopted by the GNU folks, the Microsoft folks,
even SCO as a no-win? True it is not homogenous. But we have Linux and
Mac OS/X - both strong OS's - neither would exist without dedicated
personal and corporate interests. I can write nearly identical network
code on all three, because the BSD Sockets layer was 'forked' in so many
directions. Would we be better off with none of this? AT&T's System V
staff might believe so.
Forks reflect that folks disagree, and sometimes hit insurmountable
roadblocks and obstacles. The best fork generally attracts the most
interest, but that actually means the best supported/community/docs
and many features beyond simply code.
A forked Java would not be "Java", could not be called "Java", and would
succeed only if the vast majority of the huge Java community walked
away from Sun's effort. If that happened, I'm sure such an exodus would
have been well earned.
* BSD like license - code may drift from published version,
without being disclosed (closed source).
Published code may be incorporated/adopted into BSD or GPL
licensed forks/distributions.
* GPL like license - code may drift from published version
without being disclosed to parties other than recipients
(limited disribution.)
Published code may only be incorporated/adopted into GPL
licensed forks/distributions.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Brian McCallister dijo:
> On Mar 18, 2004, at 9:49 AM, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>>
>> I have just a question: If Java goes GPL (as suggested by many opinion
>> writters), it can clash with the ASF license? I remember discussions
>> about
>> the "viral" nature of (L)GPL in Java language. Then if Java goes
>> (L)GPL it
>> will "infect" the java code in the ASF? I think we think about this.
>> Please comments about it.
>
> FWIW I hope if it a JVM is open sourced it isn't licensed on a .*GPL
> license -- and looking at the major vendors in a position to do this, I
> think it is pretty unlikely to happen that way. A BSD/ASL style license
> just works better for everyone potentially involved.
If you read the open letters there is clear they suggest an full GPL
license, because if not maybe it can end (intentionally) in a fork.
Forking the competence is a long know way to win a battle. The UNIX
history is a good example of how a BSD-style licence can end forking and
no-one is the winner.
> I don't think the JVM being GPL'ed would matter to java apps as long as
> the apps didn't make use of features specific to that JVM. The standard
> library would be the same.
:-) Interesing enough, please read the concerns described in the Java
section in http://ometer.com/desktop-language.html
> I believe the Gnome people want an
> implementation open sourced (and to their credit seem to be working on
> one), the spec is probably safely in the hands of the JCP (though Sun's
> veto power in the JCP may be a sore point for some people).
>
> FWIW -- I would love to see Sun/IBM/BEA make a proposal to the
> Incubator to donate a JVM and standard library implementation =)
>
> -Brian
>
> ps: Sun's JVM is already open source, just not free according to the
> FSF, et. al. You can grab the source, build it, use it -- just not
> redistribute it etc. You can even distribute patches -- FreeBSD does
> this now.
Not sure, here is the OpenSource def I already know:
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
There the 1st point is about Free Redistribution. This is what we cannot
have in the Sun case.
I am +1 on a AL license in case of other products, but never in the case
of the Java VM. There is too much to risk, even for people than don't like
the GPL license. I think a GPL Java VM is the best choice to avoid
(intentional) forking.
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org> writes:
> ps: Sun's JVM is already open source, just not free according to the
> FSF, et. al. You can grab the source, build it, use it -- just not
> redistribute it etc. You can even distribute patches -- FreeBSD does
> this now.
"Open Source" has a precise definition at http://www.opensource.org/
which was based on the Debian Free Software Guidelines, and being able
to redistribute is generally considered one of the important points of
free/open source software. Please try not to dilute the term more
than it is already:-)
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 9:49 AM, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
>
> I have just a question: If Java goes GPL (as suggested by many opinion
> writters), it can clash with the ASF license? I remember discussions
> about
> the "viral" nature of (L)GPL in Java language. Then if Java goes
> (L)GPL it
> will "infect" the java code in the ASF? I think we think about this.
> Please comments about it.
FWIW I hope if it a JVM is open sourced it isn't licensed on a .*GPL
license -- and looking at the major vendors in a position to do this, I
think it is pretty unlikely to happen that way. A BSD/ASL style license
just works better for everyone potentially involved.
I don't think the JVM being GPL'ed would matter to java apps as long as
the apps didn't make use of features specific to that JVM. The standard
library would be the same. I believe the Gnome people want an
implementation open sourced (and to their credit seem to be working on
one), the spec is probably safely in the hands of the JCP (though Sun's
veto power in the JCP may be a sore point for some people).
FWIW -- I would love to see Sun/IBM/BEA make a proposal to the
Incubator to donate a JVM and standard library implementation =)
-Brian
ps: Sun's JVM is already open source, just not free according to the
FSF, et. al. You can grab the source, build it, use it -- just not
redistribute it etc. You can even distribute patches -- FreeBSD does
this now.
>
>
> At the end, if a vote if needed here, I am +1 for an open letter from
> the
> ASF. :-D
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Antonio Gallardo
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Antonio Gallardo <ag...@agssa.net>.
Leo Simons dijo:
> Something big is stirring in the java world. There's talks between Sun
> and IBM about releasing an open source version of java. There's talks
> between the linux desktop movers about adopting java as the glue that
> binds the major desktop projects together.
>
> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>
> Apache is one of the biggest open source communities, and the leader of
> the pack when it comes to open source java.
>
> I think the Apache community should work together on an open letter to
> Sun, IBM, and the rest of the open source community stating our shared
> position on the subject. Like Havoc Pennington writes
> (http://ometer.com/desktop-language.html), the "Community Should Decide"
> and "It's time to start the discussion".
>
> WDYT?
I read it yesterday and have the same feeling as you. A quote:
<quote>
Is Java an Alternative?
Java has broad industry acceptance, historically driven by Sun and IBM;
it's by far the most-used platform in embedded and on the UNIX/Linux
enterprise server. At the moment, it's more widely used on the web than
.NET. It's the obvious default given the UNIX tradition of the open source
community - have a look at the strength and volume of Java technology at
Apache.org.
</quote>
I think our position is bright about Java as THE OPTION and same as you I
think the ASF must do a open letter about this issue.
As a collateral effect, an open letter will bring more people to review
the Java stuff in ASF. It cannot harm us after all. I also remember the
issue about Sun and Tomcat certification many months ago.
As a friend (Federico Heinz -
http://www.gnu.org/people/speakers.html#Heinz) told me 3 years ago: "Sun
often comes late of what is the best to do, but at the end it does what is
right". But in this race I think we can act as a catalyzer.
I have just a question: If Java goes GPL (as suggested by many opinion
writters), it can clash with the ASF license? I remember discussions about
the "viral" nature of (L)GPL in Java language. Then if Java goes (L)GPL it
will "infect" the java code in the ASF? I think we think about this.
Please comments about it.
At the end, if a vote if needed here, I am +1 for an open letter from the
ASF. :-D
Best Regards,
Antonio Gallardo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
David N. Welton wrote:
> Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org> writes:
>
>
>>I suspect that getting a consensus from the ASF members, much less
>>the community at large, as to a stance on open source Java will be
>>pretty difficult. The ASF is made up of individuals, not a small
>>number of which are intimately involved with each of the major JVM
>>providers.
>
>
> Is anyone actually against this? I would find that disheartening. I
> think a simple, general statement would be a good contribution:
>
> "The Apache Software Foundation would like to add our encouragement to
> the parties looking into open sourcing some or all of Java. We are in
> no way opposed to the existance of proprietary software, but in our
> years of experience working with open source infrastructure, have come
> to recognize that having the basic building blocks for some of our
> most successful projects be free would be of enourmous benefit to all
> involved, both individuals and corporations"
>
> Or something along those lines...short, sweet, not asking, but
> suggesting.
>
I would totally give my +1 for something like this.
--
Stefano.
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org> writes:
> I suspect that getting a consensus from the ASF members, much less
> the community at large, as to a stance on open source Java will be
> pretty difficult. The ASF is made up of individuals, not a small
> number of which are intimately involved with each of the major JVM
> providers.
Is anyone actually against this? I would find that disheartening. I
think a simple, general statement would be a good contribution:
"The Apache Software Foundation would like to add our encouragement to
the parties looking into open sourcing some or all of Java. We are in
no way opposed to the existance of proprietary software, but in our
years of experience working with open source infrastructure, have come
to recognize that having the basic building blocks for some of our
most successful projects be free would be of enourmous benefit to all
involved, both individuals and corporations"
Or something along those lines...short, sweet, not asking, but
suggesting.
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Brian McCallister <br...@apache.org>.
I suspect that getting a consensus from the ASF members, much less the
community at large, as to a stance on open source Java will be pretty
difficult. The ASF is made up of individuals, not a small number of
which are intimately involved with each of the major JVM providers.
I do think that if Sun is serious about their investment in Gnome
(which was a big deal before the Novell buyout, so who knows) and
serious about getting Java on the desktop, there is the potential for
win-win.
-Brian
On Mar 18, 2004, at 8:16 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> Something big is stirring in the java world. There's talks between Sun
> and IBM about releasing an open source version of java. There's talks
> between the linux desktop movers about adopting java as the glue that
> binds the major desktop projects together.
>
> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>
> Apache is one of the biggest open source communities, and the leader
> of the pack when it comes to open source java.
>
> I think the Apache community should work together on an open letter to
> Sun, IBM, and the rest of the open source community stating our shared
> position on the subject. Like Havoc Pennington writes
> (http://ometer.com/desktop-language.html), the "Community Should
> Decide" and "It's time to start the discussion".
>
> WDYT?
>
> --
> cheers,
>
> - Leo Simons
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
> IoC Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/
> Articles & Opinions -- http://articles.leosimons.com/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but
> people wouldn't obey the rules."
> -- Alan Bennett
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
>>> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
>>> the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the article ?
>> Which two? I've had a thought to try testing James under gcj at some
point.
>> RedHat has already done a whole bunch of Java-based Apache projects with
>> gcj.
> Well, if you read the article that started the thread... You won't like
> it... The other open source java virtual machine is ... Mono.
The author failed to list several Open Source JVMs. Potentially the most
promising overall, is IBM's Jikes RVM. I think it would be fine if the GUMP
Project wanted to use Jikes RVM as part of their testing on the GUMP server.
Depending upon how long each run takes, I could see GUMP doing runs with
each of several JVMs, if the GUMP PMC felt that such compatibility testing
was of interest. That would be particularly helpful if, as I hope, we get a
JVM and Java class library here soon, but until the Software Grant is in
Jim's file cabinet, I'm not counting chickens.
See: http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2003-04/msg00038.html for a
one year old summary of IKVM vs gcj vs Jikes RVM running Eclipse 2.1. The
Jikes RVM is under the Common Public License. There seems to be a problem
with some of IBM's web sites today, but this URL works:
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jalapeno/.
Personally, I've been planning to try James under GCJ, because I would like
to see the impact of AOT native code compilation.
> At the moment Classpath project provides an almost complete
> implemnetation of the JDK1.3 ( with a lot of JDK1.4 ). And
> the same implementation is shared by all open source VMs
> that I know.
The quality has been uneven, but is apparently good enough to run Tomcat,
Ant, and several others. IBM's Jikes RVM uses Classpath.
Classpath is GPL, with a binary distribution clause. Having corresponded
with some of the Classpath developers, I know that their expressed intent is
for it to be non-viral when distributed with non-GPL applications. I don't
know what official stance the FSF takes on that, though.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
>>the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the article ?
>
>
> Which two? I've had a thought to try testing James under gcj at some point.
> RedHat has already done a whole bunch of Java-based Apache projects with
> gcj.
Well, if you read the article that started the thread... You won't like
it... The other open source java virtual machine is ... Mono.
I think supporting GCJ and maybe kaffe would be good enough to start.
And regarding Danny's comment - yes, testing and reporting bugs is the
best solution, but just like we worked around bugs in Sun's VM, we
should also try to work around bugs in the open source VMs, at least
until the bugs are fixed ( or even better - until patches we send get
included into the JVM CVS ! :-).
At the moment Classpath project provides an almost complete
implemnetation of the JDK1.3 ( with a lot of JDK1.4 ). And the same
implementation is shared by all open source VMs that I know.
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 11:06 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> Serge Knystautas wrote:
>
>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>
>>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>>
>>
>> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
>> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
>> specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
>> active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>>
> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
> the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
> article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
> source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
> really matter".
Perfect - this is the way that the ASF has always supported open-source
java - by actually doing it...
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 11:06 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> Serge Knystautas wrote:
>
>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>
>>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>>
>>
>> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
>> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
>> specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
>> active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>>
> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
> the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
> article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
> source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
> really matter".
Perfect - this is the way that the ASF has always supported open-source
java - by actually doing it...
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Berin Lautenbach <be...@wingsofhermes.org>.
>>> Nobody has been stopping you from proposing an incubation project
>>> about this.
>>
>>
>> Why would it be an incubation?
>
> Because all new project have to go thru incubation to get up to speed.
All project that are bringing source and/or committers from outside the
ASF need to go through incubation.
If a bunch of ASF committers want to create a new project that is based on
entirely ASF owned code (or start with no code at all) then I do not
believe incubation is required.
Cheers,
Berin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>>>>What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work
>>>>>with the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
>>>>>article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
>>>>>source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
>>>>>really matter".
>>>>
>>>>Nobody has been stopping you from proposing an incubation project
>>>>about this.
>>>
>>>Why would it be an incubation?
>>
>>Because all new project have to go thru incubation to get up to speed.
>
>
> What new project? I didn't see one. I don't think Geir saw one. All I saw
> was a notion that existing projects would test with other JVMs. This could
> be done by each project that cares to do it, and perhaps GUMP could do it
> for all.
>
> And, by the way, outside projects enter the ASF through the Incubator. I
> don't believe that anyone has ever said that if, for the sake of argument,
> Cocoon wants to build a new Flash-based webapp framework, that it needs to
> start it in the Incubator.
>
> Did I miss a memo?
No, you are both right, it's me misunderstanding Costin's comments.
Apologies, I need a brain transplant soon.
--
Stefano.
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
>>>> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work
>>>> with the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
>>>> article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
>>>> source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
>>>> really matter".
>>>
>>> Nobody has been stopping you from proposing an incubation project
>>> about this.
>>
>> Why would it be an incubation?
>
> Because all new project have to go thru incubation to get up to speed.
What new project? I didn't see one. I don't think Geir saw one. All I saw
was a notion that existing projects would test with other JVMs. This could
be done by each project that cares to do it, and perhaps GUMP could do it
for all.
And, by the way, outside projects enter the ASF through the Incubator. I
don't believe that anyone has ever said that if, for the sake of argument,
Cocoon wants to build a new Flash-based webapp framework, that it needs to
start it in the Incubator.
Did I miss a memo?
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>
> On Mar 18, 2004, at 7:10 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> Costin Manolache wrote:
>>
>>> Serge Knystautas wrote:
>>>
>>>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>>>>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
>>>> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate?
>>>> Maybe specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the
>>>> most active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>>>>
>>> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work
>>> with the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
>>> article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
>>> source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
>>> really matter".
>>
>>
>> Nobody has been stopping you from proposing an incubation project
>> about this.
>
>
> Why would it be an incubation?
Because all new project have to go thru incubation to get up to speed.
--
Stefano.
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 7:10 PM, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Costin Manolache wrote:
>
>> Serge Knystautas wrote:
>>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>>
>>>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>>>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
>>> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate?
>>> Maybe specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the
>>> most active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>>>
>> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work
>> with the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
>> article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
>> source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
>> really matter".
>
> Nobody has been stopping you from proposing an incubation project
> about this.
Why would it be an incubation?
>
> --
> Stefano.
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Costin Manolache wrote:
> Serge Knystautas wrote:
>
>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>
>>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>>
>>
>>
>> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
>> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
>> specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
>> active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>>
> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
> the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
> article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
> source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
> really matter".
Nobody has been stopping you from proposing an incubation project about
this.
--
Stefano.
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
> the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the article ?
Which two? I've had a thought to try testing James under gcj at some point.
RedHat has already done a whole bunch of Java-based Apache projects with
gcj.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
RE: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
> the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the article ?
Which two? I've had a thought to try testing James under gcj at some point.
RedHat has already done a whole bunch of Java-based Apache projects with
gcj.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Leo Simons wrote:
>
>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>
>
> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
> specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
> active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>
What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
really matter".
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Leo Simons wrote:
>
>> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
>> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>
>
> In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
> organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
> specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
> active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
>
What about starting by making sure Apache java projects _do_ work with
the 2 open source JVMs that are mentioned in the
article ? That would be a statement, much better than "we like open
source java, but our software doesn't run on it because it doesn't
really matter".
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
Leo Simons wrote:
> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
In lieu of forming a statement for the ASF as a whole, what about
organizing/encouraging/guiding people who want to participate? Maybe
specific resources that should be targetted, such as where the most
active and/or productive discussions are taking place.
--
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> <sheepish>
> I wasn't subscribed to community@ until now, so if there's something
> there that wasn't xposted to general@, let me know...
> </sheepish>
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/SummarizeList?
listName=community@apache.org
Beware: content is public.
The subscription is limited to the committers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
<sheepish>
I wasn't subscribed to community@ until now, so if there's something
there that wasn't xposted to general@, let me know...
</sheepish>
More inline :
On Mar 18, 2004, at 11:21 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> the intention is to get involved <snip/> really wanted to keep quiet
>> about it, but your post brought this front and center.
>
> little did I know! See what happens when stuff happens on private
> mailing lists? Duplication of effort :-P
LOL
it wasn't on a private list. There was some informal discussion, and I
kept meaning to bring it up to the community in general...
>
> I'll happily shut up, since you're obviously on top of things. And
> thanks for letting us know you're on top of things :D
I won't claim to be on top of anything yet, but certainly will keep
trying...
geir
>
> --
> cheers,
>
> - Leo Simons
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
> IoC Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/
> Articles & Opinions -- http://articles.leosimons.com/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but
> people wouldn't obey the rules."
> -- Alan Bennett
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
<sheepish>
I wasn't subscribed to community@ until now, so if there's something
there that wasn't xposted to general@, let me know...
</sheepish>
More inline :
On Mar 18, 2004, at 11:21 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> the intention is to get involved <snip/> really wanted to keep quiet
>> about it, but your post brought this front and center.
>
> little did I know! See what happens when stuff happens on private
> mailing lists? Duplication of effort :-P
LOL
it wasn't on a private list. There was some informal discussion, and I
kept meaning to bring it up to the community in general...
>
> I'll happily shut up, since you're obviously on top of things. And
> thanks for letting us know you're on top of things :D
I won't claim to be on top of anything yet, but certainly will keep
trying...
geir
>
> --
> cheers,
>
> - Leo Simons
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
> IoC Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/
> Articles & Opinions -- http://articles.leosimons.com/
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> "We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but
> people wouldn't obey the rules."
> -- Alan Bennett
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> the intention is to get involved <snip/> really wanted to keep quiet
> about it, but your post brought this front and center.
little did I know! See what happens when stuff happens on private
mailing lists? Duplication of effort :-P
I'll happily shut up, since you're obviously on top of things. And
thanks for letting us know you're on top of things :D
--
cheers,
- Leo Simons
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
IoC Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/
Articles & Opinions -- http://articles.leosimons.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but
people wouldn't obey the rules."
-- Alan Bennett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com> writes:
> Costin had some good suggestions for working deeper - like ensuring
> code here works on the OSS implementations (which is really just a
> form of compatibility testing...)
That seems like something that would be beneficial without a huge
amount of effort, given how much automated testing seems to go into
everything you guys do (again, my impression...).
> The only thing we could do for OSS is to actually do an
> implementation of a JVM for some platform and get it certified,
> which is possible.
>From listening to Tom Tromey at FOSDEM, I think the "standard library"
is really where the OSS guys need the most help, rather than another
JVM. They also want unencumbered access to specs, too, but you'd have
to talk with them to get a better understanding of what they mean.
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
On Mar 25, 2004, at 6:18 AM, David N. Welton wrote:
>
> Well, according to this, the 'discussion' is over:
>
> http://news.osdir.com/article491.html
For this year, I think.
>
>> I think the best thing that ASF community members can do for now,
>> until the next news flareup, is in blogs, conversations etc, is
>> point out how much the ASF does wrt 'open source java' - how this
>> isn't a new idea and we're working hard to make it happen.
>
> I'm not a user or participant in the Java community, so my perceptions
> and impressions are those of an outsider.
>
> What does the ASF do to promote "open source java", where "open source
> java" is defined as the basic infrastructure necessary to run java
> code on computers (jvm and libraries)?
Right now we are doing nothing specifically to that end. That's
starting at the bottom of the stack, and we work from the other
direction.
Costin had some good suggestions for working deeper - like ensuring
code here works on the OSS implementations (which is really just a form
of compatibility testing...)
The only thing we could do for OSS is to actually do an implementation
of a JVM for some platform and get it certified, which is possible.
I vote we choose the .NET CLR as the first platform ;)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Well, according to this, the 'discussion' is over:
http://news.osdir.com/article491.html
> I think the best thing that ASF community members can do for now,
> until the next news flareup, is in blogs, conversations etc, is
> point out how much the ASF does wrt 'open source java' - how this
> isn't a new idea and we're working hard to make it happen.
I'm not a user or participant in the Java community, so my perceptions
and impressions are those of an outsider.
What does the ASF do to promote "open source java", where "open source
java" is defined as the basic infrastructure necessary to run java
code on computers (jvm and libraries)?
Ciao,
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> the intention is to get involved <snip/> really wanted to keep quiet
> about it, but your post brought this front and center.
little did I know! See what happens when stuff happens on private
mailing lists? Duplication of effort :-P
I'll happily shut up, since you're obviously on top of things. And
thanks for letting us know you're on top of things :D
--
cheers,
- Leo Simons
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Weblog -- http://leosimons.com/
IoC Component Glue -- http://jicarilla.org/
Articles & Opinions -- http://articles.leosimons.com/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"We started off trying to set up a small anarchist community, but
people wouldn't obey the rules."
-- Alan Bennett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 8:16 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> Something big is stirring in the java world. There's talks between Sun
> and IBM about releasing an open source version of java. There's talks
> between the linux desktop movers about adopting java as the glue that
> binds the major desktop projects together.
>
> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>
> Apache is one of the biggest open source communities, and the leader
> of the pack when it comes to open source java.
>
> I think the Apache community should work together on an open letter to
> Sun, IBM, and the rest of the open source community stating our shared
> position on the subject. Like Havoc Pennington writes
> (http://ometer.com/desktop-language.html), the "Community Should
> Decide" and "It's time to start the discussion".
>
> WDYT?
The ASF has always been a proponent for 'open source java', and while
I'm glad to see the rest of the world catching up, I believe the path
we are on is fundamentally a good one, and we shouldn't deviate too far
from it.
Here's something I wrote a little while ago for the members list,
describing what we do and will do :
1) Keep working to make TCKs available to ASF projects that implement
JSRs, and when needed, infrastructure to run the TCKs. We cover the
spectrum - from smaller WS stuff (including something for J2ME, IIRC),
to the big mosnster, J2EE. The main activity is getting TCKs in the
hands of non-members to use in ASF projects, something thats just
requiring some legal paperwork. Given that we'll have a larger and
larger group using TCKs, willing to fix them if given the chance, I see
oppo for OSS-ing TCKs. Maybe I'm a dreamer. (Note that new the
proposed JSR 241 for Groovy is going to be an OSS TCK and OSS RI).
2) Bring RIs here to the ASF. We have a good tradition of this
already, Tomcat and JSP for example, and we need to continue it, either
by taking on ownership of existing RIs, such as we are working on for
JavaMail, or hosting RIs for EGs on which the ASF has a rep (or not).
This will tend to force the "open spec" issue, as you can't get the
"free" help of an OSS community if they can't read the spec and know
the motivations behind APIs.
3) Do what we can to connect the various JSR-implementors in the OSS
community. For example, we'd like to connect all J2EE implementors,
both OSS and non-OSS (so JBoss would be invited), to talk
confidentially with each other about issues they face to pass the TCK.
This would expose the OSS communities w/ the commercial community in a
deep, technical way, which I think will help the commercial crowd form
an accurate picture of OSS.
We are the only open source entity on the Executive Committee of the
Java Community Process. The efforts of the ASF (w/ Jason as rep)
resulted in pro-OSS changes in a de-facto international standards
group. These changes included free JCP participation for individuals,
academics and non-profits, the ability to actually create a TCK and RI
under an OSS license, and the creation of the scholarship program for
individuals, academics and non-profits to get TCKs and RIs free of
charge w/ free support to certify open source projects. One very
visible result of this is that the ASF and ObjectWeb are both J2EE
licensees, and working to create certified open-source J2EE stacks.
Since this recent brouhaha started, the intention is to get involved
(me wearing the VP JCP and VP Jakarta hats makes me itch to do
something :) At first I wanted to make a public statement too, but
after thinking about it for a while, and since we had a nice quote from
Brian in the first news cycle, I put that aside for a little while.
This is a somewhat tricky issue due to the compatibility concerns and
politics involved, and it's clear that we can be most effective if
a) we are sure to continue to be a neutral party in what is currently
visible as a Sun vs IBM public pissing match - IOW, we don't pile on
Sun (nor ignore IBM)
b) we completely understand the issues facing all sides (well, both
sides, Sun and IBM, as I don't really care what ESR's issues are...)
To that end, I've been working privately (w/ JCP hat on) with a few
people, and wish to continue that way for a little while. I don't want
this to appear as anything more than me just talking to people - not an
official ASF action by any means - and I really wanted to keep quiet
about it, but your post brought this front and center.
I think the best thing that ASF community members can do for now, until
the next news flareup, is in blogs, conversations etc, is point out how
much the ASF does wrt 'open source java' - how this isn't a new idea
and we're working hard to make it happen. And we're doing it not in
the press, but where the rubber meets the road - through code and
community. This isn't a meme to be planted - just a fact to
disseminate. :)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
Re: Apache should join the open source java discussion
Posted by Geir Magnusson Jr <ge...@4quarters.com>.
On Mar 18, 2004, at 8:16 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> Something big is stirring in the java world. There's talks between Sun
> and IBM about releasing an open source version of java. There's talks
> between the linux desktop movers about adopting java as the glue that
> binds the major desktop projects together.
>
> Key ASF individuals are joining these discussions, on weblogs and
> various discussion forums. But the ASF as a whole is silent.
>
> Apache is one of the biggest open source communities, and the leader
> of the pack when it comes to open source java.
>
> I think the Apache community should work together on an open letter to
> Sun, IBM, and the rest of the open source community stating our shared
> position on the subject. Like Havoc Pennington writes
> (http://ometer.com/desktop-language.html), the "Community Should
> Decide" and "It's time to start the discussion".
>
> WDYT?
The ASF has always been a proponent for 'open source java', and while
I'm glad to see the rest of the world catching up, I believe the path
we are on is fundamentally a good one, and we shouldn't deviate too far
from it.
Here's something I wrote a little while ago for the members list,
describing what we do and will do :
1) Keep working to make TCKs available to ASF projects that implement
JSRs, and when needed, infrastructure to run the TCKs. We cover the
spectrum - from smaller WS stuff (including something for J2ME, IIRC),
to the big mosnster, J2EE. The main activity is getting TCKs in the
hands of non-members to use in ASF projects, something thats just
requiring some legal paperwork. Given that we'll have a larger and
larger group using TCKs, willing to fix them if given the chance, I see
oppo for OSS-ing TCKs. Maybe I'm a dreamer. (Note that new the
proposed JSR 241 for Groovy is going to be an OSS TCK and OSS RI).
2) Bring RIs here to the ASF. We have a good tradition of this
already, Tomcat and JSP for example, and we need to continue it, either
by taking on ownership of existing RIs, such as we are working on for
JavaMail, or hosting RIs for EGs on which the ASF has a rep (or not).
This will tend to force the "open spec" issue, as you can't get the
"free" help of an OSS community if they can't read the spec and know
the motivations behind APIs.
3) Do what we can to connect the various JSR-implementors in the OSS
community. For example, we'd like to connect all J2EE implementors,
both OSS and non-OSS (so JBoss would be invited), to talk
confidentially with each other about issues they face to pass the TCK.
This would expose the OSS communities w/ the commercial community in a
deep, technical way, which I think will help the commercial crowd form
an accurate picture of OSS.
We are the only open source entity on the Executive Committee of the
Java Community Process. The efforts of the ASF (w/ Jason as rep)
resulted in pro-OSS changes in a de-facto international standards
group. These changes included free JCP participation for individuals,
academics and non-profits, the ability to actually create a TCK and RI
under an OSS license, and the creation of the scholarship program for
individuals, academics and non-profits to get TCKs and RIs free of
charge w/ free support to certify open source projects. One very
visible result of this is that the ASF and ObjectWeb are both J2EE
licensees, and working to create certified open-source J2EE stacks.
Since this recent brouhaha started, the intention is to get involved
(me wearing the VP JCP and VP Jakarta hats makes me itch to do
something :) At first I wanted to make a public statement too, but
after thinking about it for a while, and since we had a nice quote from
Brian in the first news cycle, I put that aside for a little while.
This is a somewhat tricky issue due to the compatibility concerns and
politics involved, and it's clear that we can be most effective if
a) we are sure to continue to be a neutral party in what is currently
visible as a Sun vs IBM public pissing match - IOW, we don't pile on
Sun (nor ignore IBM)
b) we completely understand the issues facing all sides (well, both
sides, Sun and IBM, as I don't really care what ESR's issues are...)
To that end, I've been working privately (w/ JCP hat on) with a few
people, and wish to continue that way for a little while. I don't want
this to appear as anything more than me just talking to people - not an
official ASF action by any means - and I really wanted to keep quiet
about it, but your post brought this front and center.
I think the best thing that ASF community members can do for now, until
the next news flareup, is in blogs, conversations etc, is point out how
much the ASF does wrt 'open source java' - how this isn't a new idea
and we're working hard to make it happen. And we're doing it not in
the press, but where the rubber meets the road - through code and
community. This isn't a meme to be planted - just a fact to
disseminate. :)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m)
geir@4quarters.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org