Slashdot Log In
Corporate vs Open Source:Sun Stealing Blackdown?
Posted by
Cliff
on Wed Dec 08, 1999 07:18 AM
from the immovable-force-meets-immovable-object dept.
from the immovable-force-meets-immovable-object dept.
An anonymous submittor droped this in the inbox: "A Linux Today story talks about how Sun repackaged Blackdown's porting of JDK 1.2.2 and called it their own. Even the script wrappers for this thing are the ones Steve Bryne wrote for the Blackdown effort and even have the name of the Blackdown developers in it. This is ridiculous! Is this what happens when corporate meets open source?" We all knew something like this was going to happen eventually. Hopefully Sun and Inprise will realize their mistake and take steps to correct it. If they do not, though...what steps can the Blackdown team take to protect their work?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
When Corporate Meets Open Source
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 246 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
This is why I use IBM's JDK (Score:3)
logan
Playing Devils Advocate... (Score:3)
Devil = 1
Isn't this perfectly legal under the Sun Community License? It's not real nice, but I was under the impression that all changes to the Java source belonged to Sun.
Devil = 0
Overall though, even if this is ok according to "the law", it still bites the big one. I really like Java, it has a great deal of potential, (INMHO) both as a language and as a VM... stuff like this just makes it look really bad.
RobK
Wasn't this discussed earlier this year? (Score:3)
Another witch hunt! (Score:5)
Re:This is why I use IBM's JDK (Score:3)
logan
Read the java-linux list archives FIRST (Score:5)
- Inprise knows they started with Blackdown's work
- The initial PR did not mention Blackdown. Could have been the stupid marketing departments
- The Inprise folks say they are mentioning and crediting Blackdown in press interviews at the Java conference in NY
- everyone agrees more communications between the teams would help
- The SCSL apparently allows Sun to do anything it wants with any code provided back to them.
And BTW, a new release candidate of blackdown's port was released yesterday!
I'm concerned about Sun, too. Don't attribute to deliberate malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity [paraphrasing Pournell]. But keep your powder dry [anon.]
License (Score:5)
It says quite clearly on a page pointed to by the Blackdown FAQ about licensing [javasoft.com] that Sun owns all changes made under the non-commercial internal use agreement that the Blackdown team have agreed to.
If they object, having accepted the agreement, then that is their silly fault, frankly. To be honest though, I don't expect they will object as long as Sun give credit where it is due, and I imagine that their not doing so immediately is just a screw-up.
Re:Contrast this with IBM (Score:3)
I *hope* Sun hasn't stolen Blackdown (has anyone got in touch with them? Have they made a statement?). It's entirely possible that Blackdown turned the code over to them and Sun completed it. Before we start burning Sparc boxes in effigy, we should get a little more information.
Dana
Growing Pains (Score:4)
Any large corporation is very slow to change beneath it all (that's just the nature of the beast)--even though it would seem that they've changed thanks to marketing hype, etc.
If we voice our opinions (politely, preferably) about such things, most likely the changes will take place.
It's impossible to expect someone that has put nails into the top shelf of a cabinent for 20 years, to get up, go to another part of the factory and start painting PERFECTLY.
It takes JOB TRAINING. Who trains the corporations? The public does. Who trains the public? The media does. Who trains the media? Hmmm I'll stop before I start ranting..
Just raise the 'penalty flag' tell them the mistake politely (especially in public), and wait a bit. They'll learn.
With thanks,
Tenement
--
Re:Java should disappear from our radar (Score:5)
Every place I've worked has happily used proprietary tools.
I work for a consulting company. 1/3 of the people do mainframe work, about 1/2 work on VeeBee, and the remainder do training or work (like I do) in Java, C/C++, UNIX, etc. Our business is based on the fact that companies produce proprietary languages like VB, Powerbuilder, Delphi, Visual C++, etc. They may be based on standard languages, but they are NOT standards except to themselves.
As long as there is money to be made in Java, I'll end up continuing to work in it. I might really want to be doing projects in Python or C++, but I'll end up working in Java because that's where the money is. And it's the same way for business. My clients don't care if Java is proprietary or not as long as their web-apps get done on time, just like they've always approached client server development.
So, in the end, it doesn't matter to the people who really matter--the people who pay for my paycheck. If you want this to change, the staff people in these corporations need to convince their managers that only standards-based and open-source products should be used for development.
Chris
Waiting for that check in... (Score:3)
At the risk of treading on etiquette, here's a snip from a post made by one of the BlackDown contributors on a Sun mailing list:
Well, as I said in another mail, it looks at least a lot like they started out with the results of 4(?) years of Blackdown porting efforts. You need to have been on board in order to get a feel for the awful amount of work necessary to convert Solaris' threading to Linux' threading, etcetera. That this results in a comparatively small patch file does not mean that they weren't 90% jumpstarted by the Blackdown effort, and indeed only added a couple of patches and a few bits of functionality.
Of course, the really great thing is that a) we (Blackdown) were unaware of this effort, and b) we still have to see these fixes contributed to Blackdown. Not that it is really necessary, because the first team member already resigned so I think Sun and Inprise can maintain the port all by themselves in the future. I certainly won't lift a finger anymore to debug the Intel port...
Don't cry GPL (Score:4)
The code in question was not GPLed. Therefore the point is moot. In fact it was originally based on Sun code which was licensed with the requirement that changes became the property of Sun. Sun apparently used this to their advantage, as one might expect a business to do. You may argue the political sagacity of their move, but it seems perfectly legal to this non-lawyer.
--
Re:hmmm... (Score:5)
Here's an example: About two years ago I was developing an application for a client (who will remain nameless), and the app needed to have some simple word processing abilities (mostly just font support and page formatting abilities). While I got that portion of the application developed properly, there was a kludge in the code that I didn't particularly care for and which was slightly buggy. About 3 weeks after I wrote that portion of the app, I went over to a friends house and found him trying to track down a bug in a GPL'd word processor (which will also remain nameless). Since he had it open anyway, I decided to take a look and see how the author of that program had handled the bit I'd kludged. I liked the way the author had done it and a whopping 15 lines of his code ended up in my program (with just a little bit of editing).
So the question is, did I violate the GPL? What if I had just been "inspired" by his code and re-written a similar bit of code from memory? Could/should I be sued? Can I be forced to open the source? (I actually sold the program and all rights to the client, so I couldn't do that anyway) Where is the "magic line" here?
In case you can't tell, I've been wondering about these things for quite a while but this is really the first opportunity I've seen to bring them up
Blackdown's mistake (Score:5)
In hindsight it turns out to have been the other way around. Java, while a nice language in some respects, was basically just so much hype. Linux on the other hand quietly attracted 10-20 million users and snuck its way into corporate server rooms everywhere. It's growth rate appears to have not slowed down in the least, while Java languishes for lack of mindshare. Java needs Linux far more than Linux needs Java, and Sun successfully suckered good people into doint their work for them at no cost.
Very unfortunate, but a good lesson why one should really think twice, or even ten times, before contributing to a project under Sun's "community" license.
Why We're Upset By This (Score:3)
The way I see it is, we have been the victums of mininformitive news realease. Had the realease stated "O happy Day! Sun going to support Java for Linux!" We would, for the most part, been completly supportive of Sun. However the headlines,
Questions? Comments, email me.
Flames, raves, rants, complaints? Redirect to
Re:What licence? (Score:3)
> xemacs and made it closed source.
no, it wasn't. do some research before you go around badmouthing a perfectly legitimate open source project like xemacs.
http://www.xemacs.org/About/XEmacsVsGNUemacs.ht
Time to turn to Microsoft? (Score:4)
No estabilshed company is a friend of open source.
Redhat, etc owe their existance to open source programs, but Sun, Oracle, HP, Corel and even Inprise are just using us to get what they want.
Perhaps IBM is different.. They have at least tried. Maybe SGI, too - it looks like they need Linux to survive, now.
But understand this: MS should no longer be the primary target of our flames, and matching Windows should no longer be the goal of our development projects.
With the DOJ and the press watching MS like a hawk, we need to refocus.
Linux is now, without a doubt the premier Desktop Unix thanks to GNOME and KDE nothing against *BSD, but Linux is slightly better here, if only because that is what most developers use.
Next year Ittanium (sp?) comes out. Linux will be ready, for sure, and it will probably run flawlessly sooner than Windows2000 - but that ain't the game any more.
World Domination, remember?
Next year Montery also arrives. I still havn't seen even any speculation on how well Linux will compare to that.
SCO, HP, Intel, IBM and Compaq makes a pretty impressive team - all (except SCO) have Linux projects, too. What's going to happen when Montery and Linux go head to head for the same space?
Don't think that "Montery will be high end, and Linux will take the low end", either. That is just market speak for not having the features, yet. Both Linux and FreeBSD will, I believe, be very close to Montery (and Solaris) on Intel by next year.
What's going to happen then? Can we rely on Red Hat and VA Linux's money to compete?
Don't forget, these companies aren't like MS. They make pretty good software (for the most part).
Things like StarOffice are dangerous to Open Source, because they give the power back to the companies - and yet they are just as cheap (to the consumer) as Open source.. until Sun changes the file format or something like that.
Maybe it is time to play the Windows card? Linux does operate well in a Windows environment, and Windows computers are easily converted to Linux. Perhaps we need more open source software that interoperates well with MS stuff. Samba is great, maybe we need something that can provide DCOM services?
My Enemy's enemy is my friend. Sun was a useful ally. Lets not get stabbed in the back.
Re:Java should disappear from our radar (Score:3)
And if you use any of VC++'s code generation, you are going to get stuff that is MFC dependant, which is in turn Win32 dependant.
Personally, I had a lot better luck with the Powersoft (Watcom) C++ compiler when I had to generate binaries under Windows. Their library implementations were much more normal.
Re:SUN is as bad as Microsoft (Score:3)
This is one reason why some people prefer the phrase "free software" over "open source". Because, as RMS points out here [gnu.org], the phrase "open source" de-emphasizes the community aspect of free software, and has led some companies (most egregiously, Apple) to thinking that they can just open up a little bit of code and then get free development.
For the record, I'm no free software firebrand. But given recent events, I've started re-reading some of RMS's tracts, and they continue to make quite a bit of sense. Sun is one company that just doesn't seem to get it (although the jury's not out yet). Does IBM get it? Too early to tell. It seems that the only ones that do are new companies (e.g. Red Hat/Cygnus, SuSE, etc.) that have started since the free software movement began.
Danger - Good word for Sun sighted on Slashdot (Score:3)
If their marketing and communications were as good as some of their technology then we'd have MCPs sitting on street corners with cardboard signs offering to reboot computers for food.
It's partly Suns own fault and this looks like another PR own goal but it's sometimes sad to see the slagging they get here no matter what they do. Among other things Sun created Java, not the dancing paperclip or the ten minute uptime. Take your pick but I know which camp I'm in.
The SCSL isn't a great deal in my opinion but they have yet to force people to sign it at gunpoint.
What about PPC? (Score:3)
This was posted to the linuxppc-dev [linuxppc.org] list a few days ago. Today, he posted to the list again, saying he had left Blackdown and asked if anyone wanted to take his place. For LinuxPPC users, this just plain sucks, as there is now no active jdk development for the platform. We can't blame Kevin, and I see this as a bad move by Sun all around.
Re:Sun, Java and ECMA (Score:3)
Part of what is not mentioned in any of these articles is that the former head of Java development at IBM (Patricia Sueltz) was lured to Sun [cnet.com] towards the end of the summer and is now in charge of the Java effort there. While the article which announced the change emphasizes her wide view of Java and desire to keep Java unified, it remained to be seen whether this was lip service or not.
My thoughts are that Pat Sueltz did enough good for Java while at IBM that she ought to be amenable and keep a listening ear for response from those of us who count ourselves as "individual" (vs. corporate) members of the Java Community. Feel free to use this link to the java.sun.com feedback page [sun.com], but please, be polite. Turning the wrath of /. on any company via their provided feedback mechanism(s) has bad karma, and a few well thought out, reasonable responses will get more attention that a thousand flame messages.
It ain't so (OT) (Score:3)
You shouldn't come here for accuracy. You might come here for breadth of view and new insights -- or just a place to rant
If you want easy to use, predigested news, you're simply in the wrong place. Slashdot news requires thought, and sometimes research, not just passive acceptance as truth.
If this article is so bad, why not tell us why? Do you have facts that contradict it? Yes, the title is hyperbole, it was the credit that was stolen, not the code, but it's as accurate as most newspaper headlines. Seems to me this is an important story and I'm glad it ran. For a better written article try the place it broke, LinuxGrrls [linuxgrrls.com].
Re:Contrast this with IBM (Score:3)
They are a big, greedy corporation, but I think they understand how open source stuff can benefit them.
I do hope, however, the Sun will give credit where credit is due to the Blackdown team when release the production version (what we have right now is a release candidate).
Dana
Re:Not a problem, IMO (Score:3)
If someone collected contributions to a charity, and then claimed to be contributing the money themselves with no mention of the real contributors, people would be outraged, and rightly so. This is not much different. In the real world, the money goes where it's needed and seemingly no harm is done. But try getting contributions again from those that were shafted. The problem is the same for Sun. Unless they move to correct this quickly, I think the SCSL is dead.
Re:Another witch hunt! (Score:3)
:)
Bravo Sun, Happy Birthday #4097810, Clueless /.ers (Score:4)
Congratualtions Sun. You have _finally_ done what more than 1500 Java developers have clearly been asking you to do for two years, TO THE DAY.
Bug #4097810 was posted [sun.com] on December 8, 1997. The number one bugfix request (now request for enhancement) for the entire period, indeed the request that has had more votes than the rest of the top 25 requests COMBINED has been to treat Linux as a first tier platform, to handle the releases for Linux in-house, instead of the arm's length (although increasingly more direct) support that, to date, has been given to Blackdown.
Today's announcement is great. This is what many hundreds of Java developers have been looking forward to, and what Blackdown and Sun have been working towards. I think that Sun and Blackdown deserve kudos for achieving this excellent result.
The focus of clueless slashdotters, who literally don't know how Blackdown came to have access to the code in the first place, how much direct assistance Sun has given to Blackdown, and who haven't noticed that Blackdown is actively involved in what's happened today is on an equally uninformed opinion piece in LinuxToday.
Wake up people, this announcement is what Sun, Blackdown and hundreds of Java developers have looked forward to for years.
This story is not about open-source, it never was, Blackdown was working with confidential code from day one, and it is apparent from looking at Blackdown's site that today's announcement isn't a problem, it's just part of what they've been working towards.
Re:Read the java-linux list archives FIRST (Score:3)
I get the distinct feeling that Sun is coming under fire for this only because they are Sun and people don't like the SCSL. But what people need to realise is that Sun's support for open source efforts is a healthy thing for all of us. We now have an approved JDK and JVM. Yay! Much better that, than having Sun fight us tooth and nail, and publishing soppy MS-style "Linux Myths" pieces on their web site.
Sun should be applauded for going as far as they have. After all, they are a pretty damn big company who *still* depend upon their IP to stay in business, and it can't be an easy thing for a dinosaur to welcome the new sleek, fast, sharp-toothed mammals right into their midst.
If open source is as powerful as we all say it is, then Sun will realise in time that it is the way to go. We should give them our (guarded)support and go along with it. Yes, by all means, keep your powder dry.
With Intel, IBM, SGI, HP, Sun (and Dell and Compaq too) all contributing to the cause in one way or another, we have the greatest opportunity to win the marketing war against MS. We have *never* been in a stronger position.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction
I disagree with your last paragraph (Score:3)
The GPL expressly does not forbid what Sun did to Blackdown. There is nothing illegal in taking a GPL'd program, making zero or more changes to it, and calling it your own, as long as you preserve the original copyright (of course, you may copyright any changes you make). The very fact that GPL does not require you to make mention of the original developers is what makes the "old" BSD license incompatible with GPL.
As to whether people will offer you good or ill will is another story, as ESR has discussed many times.
Christopher A. Bohn
Re:Another witch hunt! (Score:3)
I can imagine that for the average user the fact that some blackdown code is hidden in the product is not particularly relevant information so that might have been a reason for SUN not to provide this information. Probably blackdown is not the only contributing party to the product. I imagine they got some help from companies like IBM and inprise as well and they are not mentioned either.
In a way the blackdown project must have been a bit of a failure in the eyes of SUN, I mean they put out their stuff to have it ported and in the end they had to jump in to get things to work.
BTW. Has anybody actually tried the new JDK? How does it compare to the blackdown release? Is the performance any good or do we have to wait for a decent JIT to be released?