So some one please correct me if I'm wrong. The JVM is closed source and proprietary? That means that they can decide to require a paid licence anytime they chose ?


@yisraeldov Nope. Reference implementation of JDK is OpenJDK which is free(ish) software (and most certainly open-source).

The problem is Oracle JDK will get free support for 6 months each release, and to get longer support you need to pay.

Of course nothing stops Red Had and friends to maintain and support open source fork --- whether you'll get the same kind of support contract its another pair of shoes.

@jacek Ok, so if oracle decides one day to sell to, IDK, Microsoft, they can't go and make JVM closed source or tied to some EULA that would then impact all of my code written for JVM?

@yisraeldov I'm not a lawyer, but I guess that not since Open JDK is th reference implementation and it is open. Also I guess that this would lose Oracle a lot of corporate clients, that have '[ ] has multiple intependent vendors' checkbox.

@yisraeldov @jacek

Although there are proprietary and/or restricted usage implementations of Java SE out there (Azul’s Zing, Oracle’s JDK etc), for a vast majority of users there is always the option of using an OpenJDK binary, which is “free as in speech” as it is GPLv2+CE licensed.

@maridonkers @yisraeldov Does GPL protect from any trademark / patent issues in case Oracle goes (more) evil?


Frankly I have no idea (but for patents you can totally sue end users - this happened between Huawei anf apple for use of Intel chips).

That's why I'm mostly arguing that hurting openjdk would harm oracle, as they want to have multiple vendors.

@jacek @yisraeldov Not a lawyer but I'm not concerned at all about using OpenJDK (Linux packages) for my software.

One might take a look at AdoptOpenJDK builds.


Well I'm also not concerned, but I'm not basing my business on it.

@jacek @yisraeldov I am (basing my business on it). To be frank, the thought about being worried about this never even crossed my mind.

@maridonkers @jacek Well this is part of a larger discussion about , and I don't think it is very /#libre software friendly.

@yisraeldov @jacek Haven't read any argument that holds to support this claim.

@maridonkers @jacek What do you mean "Nothing that holds?" If you wish to address each of the points I'd be happy to hear. But I don't think you can dismiss all the claims outright.

@yisraeldov @jacek I just did. Come on, seriously? Clojure support is on Jira and usage group on Slack and therefore is not open source friendly? Suggestions about OpenJDK not free? Dismissed. Move on.

@maridonkers @jacek Again you aren't addressing the points. Slack is not FOSS, Jira is not FOSS.

For a software to be friendly it shouldn't retire using proprietary tools.

Also it is not that support is on Jira, contribution is only though jira and submitting patches.

@maridonkers @jacek apathy is not a proof of incorrectness.

I would assume, from your other comments that you don't care so much about .

@yisraeldov @jacek Actually I care a lot about #FOSS. Enough to not get distracted by these petty attempts. And I've already made comments about OpenJDK being free, open source #Closure for #ClojureScript. So your assumptions don't hold; again, dismissed, move on.

@maridonkers @jacek Again you have not addressed, either of the points about Slack or Jira other than saying that you don't care and telling me to "move on". I am open to having my mind changed, but just saying you don't care does not prove my assumption wrong.

Show newer
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!