Open Source J2Se is an absolute must for Java developers; All hail Apache Harmony
By Angsuman Chakraborty, Gaea News NetworkMonday, May 9, 2005
We absolutely need Open Source Java today. I realized after a long time that Java must be Open Source sofware for its own good. I was wrong all along. The one thing it needs most is the pride and honor associated with The GNU GPL (praise The Mr. Richard Stallman) or the The Apache License. Finally our beloved language can join the leagues of Mono, Maven, Jelly, Struts(now obsolete), James and others.
Think for a moment. How simple it will be to incorporate your changes in the JVM with an Open Source version, the Garbage Collection hack you wanted to incorporate all along but was thwarted by Sun folks. Looks at the Bug Parade for Java. Now you too can jump in and fix bugs. After all who doesn’t love working with Open Source products like Maven, for example?
You can even fork your own JVM and crank a new version over the weekend (like Marc Andresson apparently created an early version of netscape browser over an weekend). So we will have great choice of Open Source JVM market with hundreds to choose from (like Open Source CMS).
Our new mantra will be - “Which JVM do you want to use today?”
Look at JCP. It actually requires money to join! This is bourgeois mentality! We don’t need any of that!
Now we can incorporate scores of frameworks in Java core. IoC is a must addition to Open Source Java. So are velocity, struts and other such gems. Don’t ask me how. Open Source enthusiasts are great; they will figure it out in no time. Remember Open Cola?
|
August 19, 2007: 7:19 pm
Which JVM do you want to use? Which Linux do you want to use? Can you see the problem with open sourcing Java? Azlan |
|
January 3, 2006: 1:20 pm
[...] In the new year lets look back to Apache Harmony, the much publicised effort to create “open source” J2SE announced in early May last year. [...] |
|
May 23, 2005: 5:25 pm
In an interview, Gosling argues that Harmony ammounts to forking, even if it doesn’t create a fork and Apache sais it doesn’t want to fork. “[Apache] says a lot of words about why they want to do it. Exactly why is it critical to have a delta between our source licence and the source licence that they think is appropriate?” he said. “I understand why they would like it to be different. From our point of view that would actually be more destructive than helpful. It boils down to forking: they believe that the ability to fork is an absolutely critical right.” https://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2135503/sun-lashes-open-source-j2se |
|
May 10, 2005: 9:56 pm
@Tom I don’t disagree with that. I just don’t think OSS is the solution. A better license with an exception clause for Linux is all it needs. > Here’s my take: They want control. You bet they do. I would have done too and for two valid reasons. Keeping Java ownership gives them name and fame and obviously some advantage in their venture in software services arena (why do you think IBM created jikes). It also ensures continuation of high quality of the product. In OSS world it is like Monte Carlo. You may win (rarely as in Linux or Apache) or you may lose (mostly as in Maven, Struts, WebUnit, Jelly…). BTW: Have anyone noticed jikes sounds like yikes! |
 tobrien |
May 10, 2005: 5:09 pm
Man, *that* was some *really* compelling sarcasm. You just shook me to the core with your riveting analysis. |
|
May 10, 2005: 5:13 am
I meant for a company, which is merely 5000 USD Have you ever paid to join any Open Source project? |
|
May 10, 2005: 1:08 am
It actually requires money to join! Nope, you can be an individual member, and it is for free. Get your facts right, sonny! |
|
May 9, 2005: 12:40 pm
@Huh BTW: I am sure you realize the article was made in jest, just look at the categories it is in and the last paragraph. @Tom |
 Tom |
May 9, 2005: 8:52 am
Wait, or I could help contribute bug fixes to Sun’s own (true) JVM. I think that’s called working for free. A big point about open source is that the license helps protect you from a change in the proprietor. Sun can’t guarantee they’ll always be friendly. And meanwhile, Java on Linux remains a big pain. If everything’s close-enough-to-open already, why doesn’t Sun just change the license and be done with it? There must be some reason to keep it closed. Here’s my take: They want control. And they don’t want someone else (IBM) to get control. If they open sourced J2SE, they’d suddenly have to compete. People would stay going to Sun only if Sun’s Java is superior (or at least close). Right now, it’s lock in. So it matters a lot to Sun. They’ve spent a lot of money on Java, and they don’t want to throw it out the door. So I can understand Sun’s motives, but that doesn’t make truly open source undesirable. |
 Huh |
Azlan