Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:45:08 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Arun Sharma <arun@sharmas.dhs.org> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Java (Was Re: NGPT 1.0.0 port to freebsd) Message-ID: <15164.48804.197019.760751@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <20010629102214.A10651@sharmas.dhs.org> References: <20010629010159.A8557@sharmas.dhs.org> <15164.39221.111336.661501@nomad.yogotech.com> <20010629102214.A10651@sharmas.dhs.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > With the current license, this won't be installed as part of the base > > kernel. (GPL and/or LGPL) > > I understand it'll continue to be a port. Am I hearing that it is > unacceptable even as a temporary solution because of the license ? > > > It's been answered time and time again over the past months, so you must > > not be paying attention. The binary distribution hasn't been created > > because we don't have a legal license to do so (yet). > > Yes, I've been reading that for a long time now, but it (what Sun is > doing) doesn't make any sense to me. Are Sun's reasons > > (a) Technical ? Passing of JCK etc ? > (b) Political ? Yet another competitor to Solaris ? Sun is very picky about the license they want to give us. In particular, due to a recent fight in court they had with an well-known company in the Pacific Northwest, the type of license they are proposing protects them from just about everything, but doesn't give us enough lee-way to actually distribute the license. The difficulty has been trying to appease Sun's lawyers w/out overlying restricting the team's ability to create and maintain the JDK long-term. (In other words, we don't want to have to go through this over and over again for each new JDK release). > >From your posting it appears that it's technical (not passing JCK), Passing the JCK/TCK is simply an excercise that we haven't done yet. Basically, once you pass the TCK, you must ship the *EXACT* version of the binary without any modifications. Since we are still doing development of the port, it seemed a waste of time to run the TCK when we may have to run it again if/when the license is signed. (Running the TCK is a long, drawn out process that one doesn't want to repeat if at all possible.) > well as political (not getting the license to run JCK). What is their > answer reg: blackdown.org doing the same ? Blackdown was given access to the JDK before the recent lawsuit, and as such has 'special' privileges that they are no longer willing to grant to new licensees. > May be getting Zdnet to publish an article on this is the right way to > go ? The bug parades and votes didn't seem to help much. Actually, it's the reason that Sun is doing the dance with us right now. The whole Java affair has been a series of mis-steps by all parties (myself, BSDi, and Sun), so no one party shares the entire blame. The most recent issue was the BSDi/WindRiver acquisition, which left us w/out any legal advisors (unless we wanted to pay out of the pocket, which would have cost upwards of $2K to solve, not something I can affort). We're hoping to have something for you in the near future. Unfortunately, my Sun contact went on vacation yesterday before I could get some stuff ironed out, and when he gets back from vacation, I'm going on vacation, so nothing can get done with this for at least another month. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15164.48804.197019.760751>