Re: JFORK: Or a reasonable response to the Sun SCSL
I agree completely -- I think in a few months I might be tempted to give the
HURD a shot myself -- but to think it could supplant java? Of that I am not
sure.
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 04:30:57PM -0700, Jim Franklin wrote:
> Hi Seth,
> I think HURD has potential from the fact that it is an operating
> system rather than a language. Implementation of the java 2.0 specs may
> not be constrained by sun's license, although I'm not sure.
>
> Jim
>
> Seth R Arnold wrote:
> >
> > John, there is one point you raised I am not sure I agree with:
> >
> > > 8. A HURD VM is possible due to the nature of its message passing system
> > > and would be the most reasonable course to pursue for the development of
> > > portable software. This course would basically make Java obsolete, and
> > > would allow the use of many types of inexpensive hardware solutions to
> > > replace Sun's expensive servers and workstations. This is what they are
> > > concerned about.
> >
> > Java is being taught in many schools, mine included, as the default
> > language. Our profs do not mind if we use other languages, but all example
> > code, all example everything, the default IDE in the labs, EVERYTHING, is
> > java. That makes for a few years of CS students that know nothing but Java.
> > (Depressing..)
> >
> > Java has spread to Mac, to os/2 (I hope), win32, win3.1, free unix,
> > commercial unix, practically every platform.
> >
> > I have a hard time believing that one GNU Hurd VM module will suddenly cause
> > all that momentum to go away. (Especially, if Ean has it right -- building a
> > VM for Hurd, if built from the java 2.0 specs, is going to fall under the
> > Derivitive Works section of SCSL. And be not free.)
> >
> > Some very nice points, but I doubt the hurd will be able to serve as the
> > magic bullet.
> >
> > comments?
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 05:44:56PM -0500, John Foster wrote:
> > > I have been watching this thread for some time and feel that some
> > > reality is in order for anyone interested in this subject.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents worth:
> > >
> > > 1. Sun and all other commercial ventures exist solely for the purpose of
> > > making money. They will sometimes do some things that seem to be for the
> > > "good of mankind", but those things generally have some "lucrative"
> > > aspect to them (read SCSL).
> > >
> > > 2. The aspect of making money is not "a bad thing" in itself. The
> > > acquisition of profit by using deceptive tactics is "a bad thing".
> > > 3. The owner of any original patent/copyright license has the right to
> > > alter that patent at will. For instance if Sun decides to not make
> > > StarOffice available under the SCSL they do have the right, because they
> > > bought it, to make StarOffice a commercial package. They can do so at
> > > will.
> > >
> > > 4. Technically/legally Sun or Microsoft, or AOL and many others, could
> > > alter the terms of the current license structures so that "open source"
> > > "free" software ceases to exist. If Linas Torvalds decided that the next
> > > kernel version of Linux was not to be GPL software, he has the right to
> > > do it. Does that shock you? If it does then you need to read up on the
> > > U.S. patent and trademark guidelines as they apply to intellectual
> > > property, especially software.
> > >
> > > 5. There is a huge movement in Europe to keep software patents out of
> > > the legal system. I do not think they will be successful. However,
> > > "THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY ALL INTERESTED PEOPLE WITH REGARD TO SUN'S SCSL
> > > AND THE APPLICATION OF IT'S GUIDELINES WILL SET A PRECEDENT FOR YEARS TO
> > > COME"
> > >
> > > 6. In my opinion "the best interests of free open source software will
> > > be served by pushing forward with development of the GNU HURD system and
> > > the implementation of a HURD Virtual Machine language that has all the
> > > capabilities of Java as it is now, but is more likely to remain free.
> > >
> > > 7. If Debian and all the other Linux communities continue to put forth
> > > free software that is portable to all hardware systems they represent a
> > > serious threat to all commercial software.
> > >
> > > 8. A HURD VM is possible due to the nature of its message passing system
> > > and would be the most reasonable course to pursue for the development of
> > > portable software. This course would basically make Java obsolete, and
> > > would allow the use of many types of inexpensive hardware solutions to
> > > replace Sun's expensive servers and workstations. This is what they are
> > > concerned about.
> > >
> > > All my best wishes to the people who assist in the "Free Software"
> > > movement, and especially to those of you that do the actual development
> > > of applications.
> > > --
> > > John Foster
> > > AdVance-Computing Systems
> > > jfoster@augustmail.com
> > > ICQ# 19460173
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-request@lists.debian.org
> > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> >
> > --
> > Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/
> > Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help
> > Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into
> > your ~/.signature to help me spread!
> >
> > --
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-request@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
--
Seth Arnold | http://www.willamette.edu/~sarnold/
Hate spam? See http://maps.vix.com/rbl/ for help
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into
your ~/.signature to help me spread!
Reply to: