Open languages are not required
Dec 31, 2010, 09:04 (9 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Greg Stein)
"Given these licensing terms, the language is arguably not open,
and can only be provided by Oracle or its licensees who choose to
pay Oracle for the right to develop and offer alternative
solutions. If Oracle does not adjust the licensing of some key
Compatibility Kits, then the open principles of the JCP will be
demonstrably unfulfilled. The conclusion will be that Java is not
open and defined by a community, but according to Oracle's wishes,
needs, and concerns.
"The outcome and resolution of this fracturing and opposing
point of view is still unknown. The Apache Software Foundation is
pushing this issue into a public discussion, and the next few weeks
will shine light on the issue.
"But for the sake of argument, let us say that people declare
Java closed and proprietary to Oracle. Is this a problem for Java
developers and users?