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

Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

gregluck.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 63 posts

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#51

Post by technomancy »

crosvenir wrote: post #33
technomancy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely not true in my experience. The only difference I've noticed is that the Sun one forces you to manually download some jars in order to get strong crypto because of some outdated US legal BS, while openJDK bundles them.

The last time I used the openJDK on ubuntu was version 9.10 and then JGoodies LaF looked abysmal. Well, by abysmal I mean that the openJDK inserted spacing between most components and the sun JDK looked consistent with the rendering on Windows and AIX.

Hmm; I haven't done any GUI work with OpenJDK, but now that you mention it I do remember some caveats about the font rendering engine being one of the pieces that they were having difficult tracking down provenance on for open-sourcing.

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#52

Post by whatajoke »

whatajoke wrote: post #29
ShabbyDoo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how encumbered it is with Oracle contractual restrictions? Didn't IBM at one point license Sun code to build its own version of the JVM?

Much of high performance modern VMs (not just JVM) are built on Self project and StrongTalk acquisiotion by Sun. I think Oracle would have quite a few key patents due to this. Though the Visual works contribution to VM technology cannot be discounted. And it is owned by IBM. So probably IBM and Oracle will not use these patents against each other.

The excellent research done under Jikes project in IBM cannot be forgotten. It to contributed to IBM's patent portofolio.

Bad to reply to own comment, but can't edit it anymore.

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#53

Post by seltzered »

dminor wrote: post #5

Oracle hasn't canceled JavaFX - they're discontinuing JavaFX script . JavaFX is going to live on through an API (third time's the charm for a Java UI API?).

Still, having a separate markup/scripting language for the UI layout has become an established paradigm for anyone writing apps that need to run in a browser.

side note: this action I guess has prompted the creation of "visage" http://steveonjava.com/accouncing-visage/ as a JavaFX scripting alternative.

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#54

Post by apgwoz »

wmf wrote: post #37
lhnn wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So implementing the JVM under the GPL is legal and patent free? A group of companies could get behind an independent JVM already in progress, refine it and back it, without Oracle interference?

No, you only get patent protection if you use Oracle's GPL code (OpenJDK) . If you write your own (e.g. GCJ, Kaffe) there's less protection.

> No, you only get patent protection if you use Oracle's GPL code (OpenJDK). If you write your own (e.g. GCJ, Kaffe) there's less protection.

Which leads to the question, how much of the original fork must you maintain in order to be safe?

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#55

Post by jacquesm »

fierarul wrote: post #3
wccrawford wrote: post #2

I've noticed a trend. When people sit around and talk about forking a project, it doesn't happen. When someone forks a project, there's a chance it'll take off. You can't convince someone else to fork something. If they had the drive to fork it, they wouldn't need convincing in the first place.

Yeah, this is "Armchair forking" -- happens all the time. As you see in this blogpost it starts with the most important thing -- naming the new fork and then goes into some politics and maybe even release schedule. Of course, the second the "Post blog" button has been pressed it's all forgotten as nobody wants to actually spend time working on this.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22armchair+forking%22

Congratulations on coining a new term!

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#56

Post by joe_the_user »

bad_user wrote: post #50
btilly wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you start with existing GPL code from Oracle, then you have an implicit patent license. But your code has to be under the GPL. If you meet the "Technology Compatibility Kit", then you're an official Java and have a license. Unfortunately Sun was not in the habit of giving access to the TCK to people who were doing things they did not like with Java, and there is no reason to believe that Oracle will be more genero…

The GPLv2 patents provision is rather weak, and it is extremely unclear if derivate works of OpenJDK are protected. In case you haven't realized it, Oracle's intent is to effectively kill open-source Java.

It would be extremely difficult to sue someone who for patent infringement when they were following the letter of a GPL you issued. The law still involves a modicum of common sense. Stepping up to a judge and saying "yeah, I did say he could do that but I had an extra secret thing written on my shirtsleeve saying he couldn't" just doesn't wouldn't fly well however you try to reword it...

IANAL YMMV of course...

The weird system of Microsoft-Novel is closer to the way a sinister patent take-over could work, though; a third party who never GPL'd any code walks in and claims everyone owes them royalties, maybe. They then play divide and conquer, with the aid of some shills in the audience.

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#57

Post by zmmmmm »

dminor wrote: post #5

Oracle hasn't canceled JavaFX - they're discontinuing JavaFX script . JavaFX is going to live on through an API (third time's the charm for a Java UI API?).

I'm actually glad to hear that. I really scratched my head over why on earth Sun invented a new language for scripting UIs even while simultaneously funding things like JRuby, or having options like Groovy or Jython they could have simply run with (albeit, with some slimming down). The mind share they would have gotten by tapping into any one of those communities would have blown the lid off JavaFX adoption. Heck, even just use Javascript / Rhino which already ships with the JVM (which would ironically be a fast way to port Flash / ActionScript developers over). But announcing yet another new language to learn that is not used anywhere else in the universe? Meh.

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#59

Post by jaaron »

mseebach wrote: post #35
retroryan wrote: post #18

Why fork? Just go with Scala! http://www.scala-lang.org/

Why the downvotes? That's a perfectly reasonable suggestion. Java is attractive because it's mostly sane, and it's backed by The Enterprise in a big way. Sure, if Google, RedHat, HP and IBM gets behind a fork, it could work - but I can't really see what RH and HP has to gain there. They both need to keep support for Oracle Java to stay relevant. IBMs primary interest in Java is consulting - and the consulting-money g…

Depending on the JVM is a bigger issue than you suggest. Without an unencumbered open source JVM, any languages which rely on the JVM will ultimately be dependent on Oracle. Bugs can't get fixed, new platforms can't be ported to, improvements to the VM can't be added.

Jumping to Scala or any other language is just ignoring the more fundamental issues that have always made a proper open source JVM important, regardless of Java's corporate owner.

Re: Java as we know it is over. Time to fork?

#60

Post by nl »

dkarl wrote: post #16
Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On top of that Java has the brand. Programmers may not feel positive about it but it's embedded in a lot of large organisations, many of whom will, at the management level, be perfectly happy with the Oracle acquisition. They won't see the need or the appeal to move to something else until there is a strong incentive to do so. Against that sort of entrenchment programmers will struggle to influence things a whole loa…

Users have little obligation with respect to the Java trademark. My organization can use the word "Java" internally to remind our execs that we're doing the safe, boring thing, and there's no problem if we actually deploy Lava or Fava or Cava (my pick) to our servers. As long as we don't publicly advertise that our services rely on Java technology (and who does that anymore?) we're free to call anything Java internal…

Oracle doesn't do marketing like that.

Oracle doesn't care what you do, unless you are in their target market: enterprise software.

If you are, then no amount of talking to management will trump the potential of their talk with management: "Sorry, you are using an unsupported configuration. Your 500K support contract is now void, you will no longer receive critical updates and your licence will expire at the end of the month. Good luck getting your data out before then. Oh, BTW, if you keep your database running after the licence is expired then we'll sue you"

You'll never win taking Oracle on head on like that.

OTOH, they are very vulnerable to new applications that just happen to be written in Cava on a JVM-derived virtual machine.

Post reply on HN