Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

[sithlord48]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

Seams like oracle is really trying to destroy every open project that sun had. what is wrong with these people?

[GreyGeek]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

One name: Ellison. One verb: greed.
For some there is no limit to their avarice.

[GreyGeek]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

I jumped the gun on Canonical and removed Sun's Java from my notebook. Everything continues to work well with OpenJava, especially Minecraft, which recommended Sun's Java..

[SteveRiley]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

One name: Ellison. One verb: greed.
For some there is no limit to their avarice.

tl;dr version:

Ellison = greed

[Telengard]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

Ellison = greed

fork 'em

:P

[SteveRiley]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

You mistyped one vowel and one consonant in that verb there. :P

[Telengard]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

You mistyped one vowel and one consonant in that verb there. :P

r u srs ?

fork

[SteveRiley]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

Oh, I knew what you meant!

[ronw]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

Simon Phipps says OpenJDK was the plan all along:

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/sim...untu/index.htm

[GreyGeek]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

But Phipps also says this:

Java To Stay In Ubuntu

Java is not being removed from Ubuntu. OpenJDK is the open source version Java, is developed primarily by Oracle, is becoming the reference implementation and is available in Ubuntu. The Sun-Java packages under the DLJ were a temporary stop-gap we put in place before Java was liberated as GPL. Removing these packages is just housekeeping. There are some programs in the Ubuntu repository that will need to do rework on their dependencies (Minecraft in particular), but this is an entirely expected lifecycle step and actually I'm surprised it's not happened before.

It seems that Phipps is oblivious about Canonical's announcement to remove Sun's Java and also as to the reasons why:

“Due to the severity of the security risk, Canonical is immediately releasing a security update for the Sun JDK browser plugin which will disable the plugin on all machines.” Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers wrote in a mail to the Ubuntu Security Mailing list.

To make Phipps posting even more curious, if not disconnected from reality, he seems to be unaware of this announcement by Oracle:
http://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry...openjdk_as_the

Moving to OpenJDK as the official Java SE 7 Reference Implementation
...
The role of the Reference Implementation (RI) is to be used as the gold standard for all Java implementations. In order to have an implementation certified as Java SE compatible, an implementor must pass a large number of compatibility tests - the Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK). Furthermore, implementations may be compared to the RI as an additional check of compatibility. Basically, if your implementation has been certified to have the same behavior as the RI then it is Java compatible.
...
Finally, to be completely clear, the OpenJDK source code remains under GPL.

The RI will be available as a binary under the BCL (the "normal" Java License), not as source.

However, the TCK is a catch-22 trap, even though OpenJDK is under the GPL v2:

You want to fork the OpenJDK. You look at the license, see that it is GPLv2, say “woot!” and start hacking. You add the important optimization to your fork which you need, and now want to release it.

The catch is that there are tons of patents all over the JVM, and the GPLv2 does not include any patent protections. So, while you are clear from a copyright point of view, anyone that has contributed intellectual property to the JVM/JDK, ever, is free to sue both you and anyone using your distribution for infringing any patents they hold on their contributions. Aside from breaking the law, getting yourself, and your users, sued is not generally a good thing, so we look at option number two, passing the TCK.

Passing the TCK, which is a suite of tests used to verify correct implementation, grants you patent rights to everything folks have contributed to the Java spec over the years. So, you apply for the TCK and Oracle will give you the TCK at no charge, though it will be under NDA and will tell you that the TCK cannot be used to verify that your implementation is okay on embedded devices, such as mobile phones, kiosks, or cash registers.

You smile, nod, and run the TCK, tweak some stuff in your code and behold, it passes! Now you have a problem. You can make a release which includes the patent protections (you passed the TCK) for some usages, but not for other usages (say, in a kiosk or cash register, or mobile phone). If you say “you may not use this in those cases” you are violating the GPLv2, which does not allow you to put those kinds of restrictions on your release. If you don’t put those restrictions in place you are violating patent law and open yourself, and your users, up to patent infringement lawsuits as the TCK license you were granted specifically excludes certification on them.

More than a decade ago I read an article that discussed what corporate suits were thinking about in their battle against the GPL. The most common solution proposed back then was a patent fence around the GPL, with corporate gatekeepers controlling how the GPL can or cannot be used. The TCK is an obvious example. In order for this solution to work the patent laws, as they were then, had to be changed. Now that they've been changed you can see the results.

Anyone have any guesses as to how long it will be before Oracle adds a LICENSE FEE to that NDA folks have to sign in order to use the TCK?

[SteveRiley]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

When I removed the Sun JRE 6, unfortunately one of my favorite little utilities also removed itself -- Nixnote, an Evernote clone. But since proper Java support for that blasted Juniper VPN is more critical, I went ahead with the manual install of Oracle JRE 7. The VPN does work, so I can at least keep my job, heh.

However, today, when I tried to reinstall Nixnote, it wants to pull in OpenJDK, because the package has a dependency on default-jre. Sigh. More tinkering...

[MoonRise]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

Just wait until they pull the rug on VirtualBOX. No longer will we be allowed to use it free as normal users. It's coming. I agree with everyone on the greed analogy. I'll put it in the format that I like though. Truthfully most Open software need to watch. I saw this when the move to Open Source was starting. Corporations like Oracle, M$, etc. will buy up these initiatives and then drive them in the ground and close them off. Then they will also have control over any code and say no one can ever use it as it is their IP. I see it happening.


Ellison := greed

[GreyGeek]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

VirtualBox is a luxury, not a necessity. Dittos for VMWare. BOTH will, sooner or later for monetary reasons, go totally proprietary, especially after they think they have locked in enough users to sustain a revenue base. That's why it is a good idea to constantly keep an eye on your use of software which is not GPL, and wean yourself from them ASAP.

I've always recognized that fact, which is why I never threw my licensed XP CDROM away. If push came to shove I can always install it as a dual boot instead of as a guest OS, like it is now. But, if push came to shove, I can always kiss Windows totally good bye.

I always let my Bass take the line with them for a few yards before I yanked it and set the hook.

[Telengard]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

In the case of VirtualBox I might be willing to pay for it if necessary, even if I wouldn't be happy about it.

Otherwise, QEMU exists and is GPL. It doesn't have all the niceties of VB, but if Free Software is a requirement for you then it may be the best solution.

[SteveRiley]

Re: Important notice regarding Java packages in Partner archive

Ellison := greed

Interesting interpretation. I would have written it as an evaluation:

Ellison = greed

but I suppose an assignment statement is equally valid

Otherwise, QEMU exists and is GPL. It doesn't have all the niceties of VB, but if Free Software is a requirement for you then it may be the best solution.

Telengard, do you have much experience with KVM and QEMU? I don't need a plethora of niceties to run my Windows 7 VM, other than USB support.