The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
Why did this non-incident generate a large and confused reaction? Perhaps because people do not read these announcements carefully. Ever since the term 'open source' was coined, we have seen companies find ways to use it and their product name in the same sentence. (They don't seem to do this with 'free software', though they could if they wanted to.) The careless reader may note the two terms in proximity and falsely assume that one talks about the other."
Posted May 24, 2006 18:31 UTC (Wed)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted May 24, 2006 18:55 UTC (Wed)
by nix (subscriber, #2304)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 24, 2006 23:08 UTC (Wed)
by jzbiciak (guest, #5246)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 25, 2006 15:13 UTC (Thu)
by hingo (guest, #14792)
[Link]
Posted May 24, 2006 19:18 UTC (Wed)
by stijn (subscriber, #570)
[Link]
Posted May 24, 2006 19:20 UTC (Wed)
by madscientist (subscriber, #16861)
[Link]
Read it again: he doesn't say Sun did _anything_ wrong. What he's saying is that other people are not reading the announcement that Sun made carefully, and they are jumping to unwarranted conclusions and trumpeting this change in licensing by Sun as if it were actually anything significant, which it's not.
As for relevance, RMS is more relevant than he's ever been. Maybe his relevance is not increasing on a 1-1 ratio along with FOSS as a whole, but that doesn't mean he's less relevant.
Sun's relevance is decreasing, but as long as they support OpenOffice, at least, they'll continue to be a player.
Posted May 24, 2006 23:32 UTC (Wed)
by jtc (guest, #6246)
[Link] (5 responses)
http://news.com.com/Sun+promises+to+open-source+Java/2100...
where Sun actually appears to be saying that they are planning to open-source Jzva in the future (and implying that it would be fairly soon, but not giving a specific date).
I may have missed something, but the article appears to imply that they are using the term "open source" correctly - e.g.:
'Sun hopes that releasing Java under an Open Source Initiative, or OSI, license will increase the number of Java users. "Minimally, (we expect) that those who have said that they won't use Java unless it is under an OSI license will now use Java," Schwartz said. "It just grows the tent."'
What surprises me is that no one (not Stallman, not LWN, and not any of the commenters [so far] on this thread) appears to have noticed this. It's not the same issue, but IMO it has enough of a relation to be mentioned. (Oh yes, I just did mention it - but my point is that it seems odd no one else seems to have noticed it.)
Posted May 24, 2006 23:50 UTC (Wed)
by grouch (guest, #27289)
[Link]
Posted May 25, 2006 0:22 UTC (Thu)
by corbet (editor, #1)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted May 25, 2006 1:09 UTC (Thu)
by jtc (guest, #6246)
[Link] (2 responses)
Thanks for the response; and I'm glad to hear you noticed the announcement.
Yes, I suppose it could be called vaporware until a definite commitment with a date is given. My projection from reading the article was that the formal actual open-sourcing was likely to occur within a year; but there is no definite indication of that, so as you say, it could be up to two years, or perhaps more.
As for whether it really is going to happen, the Sun spokespersons quoted in the article are either lying (in which case they've made a marketing/publicity mistake, IMO) or it is going to happen:
'When Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz repeated Greens' statement onstage, the audience cheered. "The question is not whether we will open-source Java, the question is how," Schwartz reiterated.'
Hopefully it will happen well before Java beomces obsolete, replaced by a superior sucessor.
Posted May 25, 2006 11:48 UTC (Thu)
by markhb (guest, #1003)
[Link]
Posted May 25, 2006 12:39 UTC (Thu)
by smoogen (subscriber, #97)
[Link]
Richard Stallman lashing out at Sun. I'm trying to figure out which one The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
is less relevant. (And of course the blame falls on people who use the
phrase "Open Source" instead of "Free Software". Sheesh...)
I'd not describe either RMS or Sun as irrelevant, although both the Java licensing change and the response strike me as a waste of time to read, much less to write.The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
Actually, RMS's beef wasn't so much with Sun, but the fact that the press fell for the slight of hand Sun pulled. Sun didn't make Java any freer, they just changed the binary license slightly to make it easier to bundle with free software. But how did it get reported? "Sun Opens Java!!!1!1!!ELEVEN!!"The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
I'd just like to point out that while this indeed was a non-event from RMS point of view, it is not a non-event in general. For instance, if you happen to use Debian, installing Java just became a lot more convenient. If you use an rpm based distro and/or JPackage, it might become more convenient. The thing that happened is that Sun finally realised that the way Linux distros distribute software is more appealing than forcing users to manually download each piece of software from a web page where you have to click "I agree" buttons.
The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
So from RMS standpoint this is actually not a non-event either, since it has now become easier to distribute Java to people who otherwise mostly use free software. For Sun it was a wise move. (Which they had done 5 years ago if they really had a clue.)
To my mind Richard Stallman's ideas and ideals are very relevant. The article on Groklaw probably The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
amounts to preaching to the choir, but it need not be limited to that forum. All signs of the times
are that there *is* a struggle for freedom of ever increasing significance. As for open; it is basically
a marketing mantra, and indeed, some businesses will try to ride that wave. Free is about values
and community. (It occurred to me that you might just be trying to lure some of those freedom
hippies out of the trenches). It seems usually forgotten that businesses have a lot to gain with that
freedom too.
You are falling into the same trap as the people RMS is discussing. In no way, shape, or form is RMS "lashing out at Sun", unless you call reiterating the long-standing position that Java is not free software and non-free software is bad, "lashing out". That is completely beside the point of RMS's article.The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
As far as I can tell, the Sun announcement being discussed here is different from this recent one:The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
I am planning to conquer the universe fairly soon, but will not be giving a specific date at this time.
The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
We noticed it. It's a little too vaporware to be worth a lot of attention now - it seems it will be a year or two before they begin to get close to a free release. When that happens, we'll talk about it...
The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
"We noticed it. It's a little too vaporware to be worth a lot of attention now - it seems it will be a year or two before they begin to get close to a free release. When that happens, we'll talk about it..."The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)
Hopefully it will happen well before Java beomces obsolete, replaced by a superior sucessor (sic).
How long did that take for COBOL?
I think the issue is that Sun has made similar statements though not by the CEO in the past. At one point it was going to be under CDDL, then it was going to be under Sun Public License, etc etc. The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time (Groklaw)