OpenJDK projects promoting proprietary builds
Andrew John Hughes
gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org
Fri May 29 21:10:05 UTC 2009
I agree wholeheartedly, but have to say I long ago ceased to be
surprised by Sun builds beinge proprietary. Sadly the converse is
true; I'd be surprised by a Sun build released under the same terms as
our IcedTea builds.
On 29/05/2009, Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp.org> wrote:
> Since we are all in frantic-release mode just before JavaOne I wanted to
> double check some of the new features against other builds. I was
> somewhat surprised to find that various projects only promote and/or
> publish proprietary builds. The jdk7 binaries published on the list, but
> also nio2 builds, sctp builds (these were the two I was interested in,
> there might be others), are published under proprietary terms and not
> just under the GPL.
> The terms are particularly anti-social since they explicitly forbid
> sharing the binaries with others, learning what the corresponding source
> code is, modifying or creating any derivative works, and agreeing that
> Sun will be "irreparably harmed" if you don't keep everything you learn
> from those binaries confidential.
> Could we please have OpenJDK projects only publish artifacts under the
> terms listed at http://openjdk.java.net/legal/
> Those terms even allows publishing binaries that contain some of the
> proprietary blobs as long as the rest is published under the GPL, thanks
> to the assembly exception, if that really is necessary (and it really
> shouldn't be necessary anymore since people have been publishing full
> GPLed builds for almost 2 years now).
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
More information about the discuss