Please reread what I wrote... [LWN.net]

Not Oracle-started! Oracle-owned!

Posted Aug 14, 2010 21:02 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

In that case, does it really matter if it was a Oracle project or not?

Yes, it does. Big time.

How does this make Oracle-started projects a bigger target for attack?

They are not Oracle-started. They are Oracle-owned! Remember? All the copyrights were assigned to Sun so Oracle owns everything.

If Oracle has patents on all interesting DB features, and are ready to use them, it does not matter if it is a new MySQL feature or a new PostgreSQL feature that ticks them off.

Recall the famous line: "This suit is specifically about Google and that's it." Oracle can say so because it's sole owner of copyrights and patents. It can decide what and when to do with any potential contributor/infringer. And this will be true for anyone who'll be foolish enough to participate in non-Oracle-blessed development of said projects - it can be kicked out anytime and noone will be able to do anything. But it's hard for Oracle to single-out one particular contributor to PostgreSQL. They can do this right after patch is accepted but at this stage it's trivial to just remove it and send Oracle away - but later, when feature is adopted and widely used and intermixed with other features... in essence any attack on one PostgreSQL developer is equal to attack on all PostgreSQL developers and users. This means it's not "Oracle vs someone else", but "Oracle vs everyone else" now. Big difference.

Now, I'm not saying it's 100% safe to switch from MySQL to PostgreSQL or MariaDB (in fact I think MariaDB is not safe at all as it stands right now), but to "continue with Oracle platform and hope for the best" is stupidity itself.

Of course there are always possibility "to play it safe": to work with Oracle and develop official version by fully accepting Oracle directions and removing everything Oracle does not like. But this will mean you are now unpaid employee of Oracle... why will anyone want this?

Not Oracle-started! Oracle-owned!

Posted Aug 14, 2010 22:09 UTC (Sat) by Los__D (guest, #15263) [Link]

This makes no sense. If i.e. MySQL is forked and multiple companies join in, this is absolutely no different than another non-Oracle related project.

The only worry here is patents, copyrights and who owns them does not matter at all, since distribution is already approved by the license.

Wel, you are right... kinda.

Posted Aug 15, 2010 7:06 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

This makes no sense. If i.e. MySQL is forked and multiple companies join in, this is absolutely no different than another non-Oracle related project.

If it's forked and multiple companies join in then yes, it may be safe over time (you first need big enough userbase and Oracle can kill such coalition before it's powerful enough to resist it). What does not make sense is to work on Oracle-owned technology without forking it.

This is what MariaDB does and this is why I'm not yet sure MariaDB is safe. Too few companies are involved is MariaDB - it still can be crushed easily.

The only worry here is patents, copyrights and who owns them does not matter at all, since distribution is already approved by the license.

Of course. This is what makes Oracle special. Years ago they were strongly against patents, yet today they are happy to use them to attack other companies directly. Similar to what Microsoft did. The remedy is the same: try to stay as far as possible from them. Just like with Microsoft is hard (they are big, own a lot of technologies which are a high demand today), but this is the only sensible approach.

Forks make sense - but only as last resort, when the technology is valuable enough to risk it. All things being equal it's usually better to join some existing camp. I'm now investigating Vala: it looks similar enough to Java/C# yet totally different since it does not use virtual machine. It does not include GC, but it does include refcounting - and practically speaking it's enough: if you have such a complex structures as to make refcounting unusable usually you have too complex structures to write correct programs with them. I'm not yet convinced it's the way to go, so I'm looking on Go too. We'll see what will replace Java in the future, but it's clear that Java is thing of the past...

Wel, you are right... kinda.

Posted Aug 15, 2010 9:34 UTC (Sun) by Los__D (guest, #15263) [Link]

Oh, agreed completely that it should be forked immediately. If it is big enough a target for Oracle to go after before enough has joined in, depends on a lot of factors, but I think that it usually wouldn't trigger Oracle until a lot of backers has already arrived.

While I'm not really all that interested myself, I think that MySQL, OO.org and OpenSolaris (well, at least Solaris) has proven big enough successes for great interest in a fork. Especially OO.org is also a key factor in the battles with MS.

If Java starts getting killed or closed by Oracle, I am sure that it will be forked, and that will be with a lot of companies behind it from the beginning. It is the core business for thousands of companies, and a big part of business for many more.

Java future is bleak...

Posted Aug 15, 2010 10:12 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

I don't really see what's the big deal about Solaris: yes, it does some things better then Linux but it looks like it'll be easier to duplicate the functionality and add it to Linux rather then keep the whole separate OS around. There are IllumOS but it remains to be seen how many backers and users it'll attract. MySQL is already forked and we'll soon see how it goes. As for OpenOffice.org... the problem here is the most successful fork (Go-OO) is well-known but is Novel-backed so it's not clear how it can help in "battles with MS".

But Java... Java can be declared "dead for FOSS". Lots of Java users foolishly think they can avoid Google fate by using OpenJDK and even more of them just don't care (remember: Java was open-sourced just two years ago, before that it was proprietary... and it's backers were fine with it), but the problem here is the fact that Oracle is not Sun and it'll not spend billions on free product. Java will calcify more and more and over time will become the next COBOL. We can strike it out from the FOSS-relevant list of technologies.

The only hope is Android: if Google will be able to defend Android and Dalvik then we'll have truly open J*va-based platfrom (like we had *nix-based platform for years in Linux) and then the FOSS development can be directed this way. But this is small hope: Google may say bold words today, but if Oracle will be able to stop Android sales it'll be different tune altogether.

It's clear that people were abandoning the ship and Oracle was losing credibility in FOSS community for a long time, and now this process will speedup. But will it happen fast enough to save these projects from Oracle's iron patent-encrusted fist? This is open question...

Java future is bleak...

Posted Aug 15, 2010 11:00 UTC (Sun) by Los__D (guest, #15263) [Link]

As I said, I don't really care about any of the three, but they all have a big following.

About Java, I think it is quite too early declaring it dead for FOSS (in fact I think it is way too early declaring anything about this situation), let's see how this plays out.