Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mysterious Android codebase commit

android.googlesource.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 170 posts

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#11

Post by devsquid »

grizzles wrote: post #9
grizzles wrote: post #6

To explain if you are just joining in: This pretty much means Oracle v Google, a case with major ramifications for the industry has been settled out of court. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way.

If this inference is right, I hope this means that Google will enable the web community to use the JVM with or as an alternative to WebAssembly. Hotspot is absolutely incredible technology, and it's competitors are still many years away from coming close to matching it's capabilities.

I'm all for the JVM but it's too powerful to run arbitrary code man. No JVM in my browser please.

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#13

Post by exabrial »

wmf wrote: post #5
mahouse wrote: post #2

What's mysterious? Legit curious.

Google has made a point of not using GPLed code (except Linux) or Sun/Oracle code in Android, for technical and legal reasons. There's even a lawsuit about it. So it's surprising to see GPLed Oracle OpenJDK code being committed anywhere near Android.

Interesting, isn't Android ASL?

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#14

Post by deathanatos »

0x0 wrote: post #7
grizzles wrote: post #6

To explain if you are just joining in: This pretty much means Oracle v Google, a case with major ramifications for the industry has been settled out of court. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way.

Also, why are the two timestamps so far off? Authored in February 2015 (almost a year ago!), but committed only in Nov 2015.

This is a git repo, so "authored" tries to map to the person who wrote the content, and the "idea" of the commit, if there is such a thing. It's set when the commit is initially created, and for the most part not changed unless explicitly requested. The commit date is the actual time the commit object was made; this can differ if the commit is amended, rebased, cherry-picked, the result of a squash/fixup, etc. If a commit sits on a branch for months, then gets rebased against master, code-reviewed, and merged, those two dates will be significantly different.

This usually works as you might expect. If your coworker Joe authors a commit on a branch, and you cherry-pick it onto another branch, that cherry-picked commit is authored by Joe (and the time reflects when Joe authored it) and commited by you (at the time you performed the cherry-pick).

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#15

Post by blinkingled »

The commit references ojluni. This relates to "luni" in Android source which stands for lang util net io. Sounds like there are plans to replace the harmony implementation with OpenJDK one. License differences are definitely interesting but could be also related to performance and completeness - luni is fairly small set of classes whereas ojluni import brings in a ton more.

But what I don't understand is why they're importing the full AWT API! That's nuts.

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#16

Post by kazinator »

0x0 wrote: post #7
grizzles wrote: post #6

To explain if you are just joining in: This pretty much means Oracle v Google, a case with major ramifications for the industry has been settled out of court. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way.

Also, why are the two timestamps so far off? Authored in February 2015 (almost a year ago!), but committed only in Nov 2015.

This means that a person named Piotr Jastrzebski created a commit in February. This is a different commit based on that one (not in the sense of revision ancestry, but in the sense of rewrite history): this commit is the N-th rewrite of Piotr's Jasterbski's commit, for some N > 0, and the rewriter ("committer") is Narayan Kamath.

The rewrite can have different content: for instance, it can be altered to merge against a different parent.

An example of a rewrite is a simple cherry-pick (e.g. from one branch to another).

All these things are commits. The initial authoring is a commit, and this latest rewrite by a different person is a commit.

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#18

Post by ndesaulniers »

grizzles wrote: post #9
grizzles wrote: post #6

To explain if you are just joining in: This pretty much means Oracle v Google, a case with major ramifications for the industry has been settled out of court. I don't see how this can be interpreted any other way.

If this inference is right, I hope this means that Google will enable the web community to use the JVM with or as an alternative to WebAssembly. Hotspot is absolutely incredible technology, and it's competitors are still many years away from coming close to matching it's capabilities.

And throw out the hard work __ALL__ browser vendors are doing TOGETHER on WebAssembly? In favor of a VM that clearly has restrictions and is owned by a litigious organization? Bloating browsers by adding another VM, which will hurt throughput by having multiple GC's to synchronize?

The JVM ecosystem and Hotspot are certainly modern marvels, but there's hurdles greater than the potential benefit.

Re: Mysterious Android codebase commit

#20

Post by lovelearning »

blinkingled wrote: post #15

The commit references ojluni. This relates to "luni" in Android source which stands for lang util net io. Sounds like there are plans to replace the harmony implementation with OpenJDK one. License differences are definitely interesting but could be also related to performance and completeness - luni is fairly small set of classes whereas ojluni import brings in a ton more. But what I don't understand is why they're…

Entire AWT and Swing API. Nuts indeed!
Post reply on HN