OpenJDK Bug Tracking Project

Phil Race philip.race at
Wed Mar 16 12:14:52 PDT 2011

On 3/16/2011 11:45 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 16 March 2011 16:11, Phil Race<philip.race at>  wrote:
>> On 3/16/2011 8:57 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> You seem to have omitted the licensing of the bug system.  It should
>>> be Free Software, in line with the rest of OpenJDK.
>> This is over-ridden by a need to meet the real requirements. The licensing
>> is not
>> a real requirement. Its a preference. If some non-free software fits the
>> needs better
>> then so be it. And If Oracle is willing to foot the bill that's fine by me.
>> -phil.
> Nobody said anything about cost.  I'm talking about Free as in Freedom.
> For me, this is the overridding factor.  If we're just going to
> replace one proprietary bug database with another, we may as well just
> stick with the one we already have.

I completely understand what you mean. Its just that its not the 
overriding factor.
I don't see any necessary connection between being an open source 
project and
using an open source tool chain.
And it doesn't matter whether the software is free or not. The 
administration of
it will doubtless not be "free" in any sense.
The one that's used now isn't a problem because its not open source. Its 
a problem
because its not accessible.


More information about the web-discuss mailing list