RMS, previously, on Sun freeing java

[Xavi Drudis Ferran]

> "Xavi Drudis Ferran" <xdrudis at tinet.cat> wrote:
>> > Why all the premature Sun-bathing?
>>
>> Maybe because of:
>> a) From what I've heard they must have released the JRE for SE, ME and
>> EE,
>> which is no small thing. [...]
>
> Misreporting is widespread, even from some FSFE Fellows.  As far as I
> can tell, there is one component of the JRE for SE so far and Sun
> notes "what you don't get with the source code: the class libraries
> that in combination with the virtual machine make a Java Runtime
> Environment (JRE) or Java Developers Kit (JDK)."
> https://openjdk.dev.java.net/hotspot/
>

Ops. I thought class libraries were available :(.

> I didn't find any way to get the JRE for EE under GPL yet and I don't
> even understand ME enough to know what I'm looking for.
>

I read contradictory reports on EE. I believe it's not yet GPL,
but since sun calls CDDL open source, reporters throw it in the article.

Same here about JavaME.

> I remember the rejoicing when Netscape released their browser code.  I
> also remember how long it has taken for Mozilla and Gnuzilla to make
> that into a good free software project.  Will it take similar
> struggles to use Sun's contributions in working free software?
>

Possibly. Yet it was good news, tha trelease.

> That's silly.  Sun hasn't done most of it yet: we can say it's good
> news and we look forward to it, without suggesting the actions so far
> are sufficient.  Saying today that Sun has "with this contribution,

How did anyone suggest it's sufficient ?

> have[sic] contributed more than any other company to the free software
> community in the form of software"[1] seems just plain incorrect.  If
> they fulfil their statements, then it may be arguably true, but not
> yet.  If Sun gets all the praise today, it reduces the incentive for
> them to continue doing the right thing.
>

Well I don't have the statitstics but it could be true.
In any case I have no bais to argue it .

> 1.
> http://fsfe.org/en/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/sun_s_choice_of_the_gpl_and_rms_in_the_webcast
>
>> c) When I speak about a piece of free software I generally thank the
>> authors, I don't usually start complaining about all the rest of
>> software
>> they may have written which isn't free.
>
> I can't see the relevance of this comment.
>

The idea was: what is not available today under GPL wasn't available
yesterday either, so the news is what has been released, not the parts
remaining as they were. I don't think it's fair to just ignore what
has been released, even if it's not all. Specially considering there's
at least some promise for more.

>> Anyway I haven't checked exactly what is available, maybe I'm missing
>> something. We can talk specifics if you want. Why do you think the
>> missing
>> parts are "most of it"?
>
> I don't.  I meant that Sun announced that they will release *almost*
> enough for a buildable JDK in the first half of next year and that
> most of the releases seem to be in the future.
> http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/faq.jsp#b4
>

Yes. That's undefinite and worrying, "almost".
I thought the most needed part was the class libraries that I
thought was included. The rest had some free implementations,
although the JVM and compiler might not have full replacements.
So I didn't pay too much attention to the incomplete JDK.
It's sad that the class libraries are not available today (but no sadder
than it was last week). BUt I guess they have encumbrances
they can't easily get rid of (not that they haven't had time in 10 years...)


> Hope that explains,



Yes, thanks for pointing this out.