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

Oracle’s Java 11 trap

blog.joda.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 244 posts

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#151

Post by vvillena »

sgt wrote: post #123

This is not new, and as per: https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/terms/license... it was put in place in 2017 already. Seeing that the "LICENSE" of Java 8 simply points to their website, it means that they effectively changed it for Java 8 as well. So that means that even if you're running Java, you have three options: (1) Continue using it illegally, it will probably be a low risk. This is not advisable e…

How is this possible? I have an app that runs in the JVM which is also bundled with a JRE in some platforms. Does this mean that I cannot freely distribute it anymore?

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#152

Post by StreamBright »

dnomad wrote: post #101
StreamBright wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely not. We are installing via a package manager the Oracle issued RPM for example. I would have missed the licensing story if Joda was not writing an article about it.

How is that possible? Are you going to the Oracle download page and downloading the RPMs? Are you specifically adding a repository that includes Oracle software? There are certainly no default repositories that include this code. The whole point (and it's been this way for years) is that you can't download the Oracle jdk without clicking through a license.

New JRE/JDK gets released -> somebody from our company goes and downloads the RPM after accepting the license -> she uploads the RPM into our internal repository -> somebody from another department changes the build scripts to use the new JRE/JDK -> few minutes later we are running the dev clusters with the new JRE/JDK.

In this process the person who downloads the new RPM (aka me) has to be 100% sure that the new JDK is ok to be used. Which I completely missed (my bad) I was wondering about the GPL stuff a bit but I was thinking that Oracle came to their senses and started to distribute the JRE/JDK under a license that is better than the previous one. Again, my bad that I paid attention more to the performance improvements, modules, ZGC etc. than to the license changes. This is why I was surprised when I saw the article from Joda (his real name is Stephen?) and also upvoted, sent around to all my Java peers to be aware that this is absolutely, 100%, pure fuckery that Orcle just dumped on us.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#153

Post by LaGrange »

vbezhenar wrote: post #125
LaGrange wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly common to automate that stuff away, and not just for Oracle. For example, if agreeing to TOS was neccessary, Let's Encrypt could no longer be "totally automated". Therefore certbot has an "--agree-tos" option, present in oh so many ansible repositories.

How do you automate that? You need some kind of cookie to download JDK and you're getting it by clicking a button. The only way to automate it is to simulate "agree" click.

Curl lets you keep a cookie jar around, for example, so yes, it's pretty simple. It's also a terrible idea, but doesn't seem to stop people.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#154

Post by vvillena »

cesarb wrote: post #60
Leace wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's good that package managers ship only openjdk. When I migrated to Linux I didn't know better but as "openjdk" was easier to install than Oracle JDK I used "openjdk". It turns out it works very well, actually I can't tell the difference.

Unfortunately, many people add a repository with Oracle JDK to their package managers and install the JDK from there, due to some perceived better compatibility and/or extra bug fixes. (And in my experience, this is true for the Java plugin; the "official" plugin seems to work better than the IcedTea plugin.)

JavaFX is difficult to use under OpenJDK. I think it has become a library on Java 11, so at least that's a step in the right direction.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#155

Post by bborud »

As many have pointed out, you can argue if this is a trap or not and you can make the case for both sides. But I think that discussion in itself clearly begs the question: do you want to deal with a company that makes it easy to make a potentially immensely expensive mistake?

If anything, Oracle have demonstrated that if they feel you owe them something, they will take you to court.

I changed what primary programming language I use as a conscious decision that took years to make. First I had to find a language that was a good replacement and then I had to make the switch. Both require care.

It was easier than I had thought though. And I'm very happy I did.

Am I sure the my new primary language won't grow these problems? No. But I do know that I'd do it again if needed. There is no shortage of programming languages. There is a shortage of programming languages that have a sufficiently good ecosystem around them though.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#156

Post by ballenf »

paulie_a wrote: post #143
jodastephen wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everybody reads warnings. Many will go to that page and just go straight to the download. In addition, the warning doesn't say "not for commercial use" - you have to click through and read a long legalese to find it. Oracle could still choose to make it clearer...

It's just another license to ignore. I'll personally do whatever I want regardless of what is in the EULA.

The moral argument that code should not be restrained by artificial license, like we treat ideas, is a strong one but not made clearly here.

If code was treated more like ideas or recipes we'd all still have jobs.

If you believe that strongly enough, civil disobedience through ignoring licenses is one approach. No one should risk more than they're willing to lose on the position because you will lose if it's costing someone else enough.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#157

Post by bborud »

dig1 wrote: post #114
ofrzeta wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

import ( "net/http" "github.com/labstack/echo" ) For Hadoop I guess it depends on what you want to do. For instance there are modules for HDFS but also several module by Hortonworks: https://de.hortonworks.com/blog/go-hadoop-err-hadoop-and-go/

But you still need jre/jdk to serve HDFS ;) Also, there are tons of other missing products like ElasticSearch, Kafka, Spark...

Sure, but fight the battles you can win. The database I use wasn't written in C. That doesn't mean I have to write applications in C.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#158

Post by tastyfreeze »

hannasanarion wrote: post #32
paradox_hunter wrote: post #17

>You may not: use the Programs for any data processing or any commercial, production, or internal business purposes other than developing, testing, prototyping, and demonstrating your Application; From what I understood, I as a student could still use java 11 from Oracle, as I wouldn't be using it for "production". Is that correct? Or are there other implications that I am missing here?

Yes, that is correct. This trap is for hobbyist and professional developers whose typical workflow involves downloading Oracle's JRE to deploy their app, probably not noticing the new trap clause deep within the license agreement. My professional advice to a newcomer to the industry: stay away from Oracle. It is a blight on the software industry. Oracle is a monopolistic anti-consumer patent troll that treats its emp…

Seconded. I only wish it was easier to convince management that the cost of switching from Oracle products is worth it.

Vendor lock in is a real bitch.

Re: Oracle’s Java 11 trap

#160

Post by bodono »

bborud wrote: post #155

As many have pointed out, you can argue if this is a trap or not and you can make the case for both sides. But I think that discussion in itself clearly begs the question: do you want to deal with a company that makes it easy to make a potentially immensely expensive mistake? If anything, Oracle have demonstrated that if they feel you owe them something, they will take you to court. I changed what primary programming…

Which language did you pick?
Post reply on HN