Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Java Programming

Sun Announces Java Executive Committee Members 71

Posted by jimjag from the and-look-at-the-open-source-representatives dept.
Sun Microsystems today announced the members of their Executive Committee which will oversee the Java Community Process (JCP) program, the community-based process for developing Java technology specifications, reference implementations and associated compatibility test suites. These ECs will serve in full capacity in guiding the JCP program until the first general EC election. Of particular note is the inclusion of various Open Source leaders, including Caldera and The Apache Software Foundation.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sun Announces Java Executive Committee Members More

Sun Announces Java Executive Committee Members

Comments Filter:
  • Does this mean it's sorta open/standardized? I think that is what is holding it back.. if it were standardized would this not generate a better product, much more inter-operable, etc. Anyone?
    Glad to see posts at 3am+
  • Despite the fact that in my courses I program in Java, I haven't kept all that close an eye on the standards process. I remember awhile back though there was some flap about sun withdrawing Java from the standards process. Have they changed their position, or is this just a media trick?
  • I could never understand the argument that suggests that if Sun completely opensources Java that somehow it will get out of control or 'polluted'. Perl is a good example of something completely open that anyone could run away with and 'pollute', yet has mantained true to form. in fact, perl scripts run on more platforms than java does, I would assume. It gives me the impression that Sun wants to maintain that 'Brand' recognition (i.e. Sun's Java). Such is the way of corporations. You would think that that would have learned.

  • 3am (Score:1)

    by thetech ( 44732 )
    Yes, I do believe that articles aren't posted often enough late at night. Perhaps Taco and Co need more deliveries of caffeine from Think Geek or something. I'm nocturnal!

  • Interesting Omission... (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01, 2000 @10:53PM (#1031216)
    It's interesting that although IBM is on the Committee, they aren't amongst the many companies quoted in Sun's press release.

    Considering how much muscle IBM are putting behind Java at the moment (porting it to AS/400 and AIX, producing their own v1.3 JDK's for those platforms, plus Linux and NT, moving most of their e-business software over to Servlets and EJB's, and so on), you'd think Big Blue would have a few nice things to say about the Executive Committee.

    Yet more evidence of bad blood between the two biggest players, I guess.

  • Re:Sorta standards.... (Score:3)

    by NullAndVoid ( 181397 ) on Thursday June 01, 2000 @11:00PM (#1031217)
    Perl is a good example of something completely open that anyone could run away with

    ... perl scripts run on more platforms than java does

    Anyone *could* run away with perl, but they haven't. Nobody other than Larry makes a version of Perl, and that's why it's successful.
    It gives me the impression that Sun wants to maintain that 'Brand' recognition (i.e. Sun's Java). Such is the way of corporations. You would think that that would have learned. Totally unfair, what Sun is rightfully afraid of is that Java will go the way of Unix - 57 different flavors, each of which requires a modifications to a Makefile to even compile, much less run. The fact that Microsoft has already attempted to pollute Java is more than enough justification to keep the language centrally managed.
    The only argument I could see for decentralizing the standard is if the managing body were too slow to update it to meet new needs, which would result in proprietary (and incompatible) vendor extensions to meet user demands, but so far that's not even close to being a problem.
    Java's development process ain't broke.

  • What It Really Means (Score:3)

    by CritterNYC ( 190163 ) on Thursday June 01, 2000 @11:02PM (#1031218) Homepage
    Caldera and Apache were probably not included for their open-sourceness (is that a word?), but more as major players in the current landscape of computing. I don't think we'll see Java open-sourced under the GPL anytime soon just because the Apache Software Foundation has a seat on the Executive Committee. That aside, this can only mean good things: namely, a colaborative effort ensuring that the whole "write once run anywhere" mantra applies (and continues to apply) to Linux and Apache.

    Interesting Note: It is still nice to see Apache and Caldera (or other Linux vendors) listed among other big players in the industry, as they are in the complete list of the Committee: Apache Software Foundation, Apple, BEA, Caldera, Compaq, Fujitsu, HP, IBM, IONA, Inprise, Insignia, Matsushita, Motorola, Nokia, Novell, Oracle, Palm, Philips, Siemens, Sony, Sun Microsystems, and Wind River.

    Also, since this is only a press release (Sun's website also has it available [sun.com].), I wonder when we can get some comments from Caldera and Apache on what their gameplan/goals are for this committee. (other than the quick blurb in the press release)
  • Im a Java programmer by profession.

    I feel that this is potentially a cool thing. However, I never really saw specifications/apis as a weak point in java.

    It would be cool if someone could address the more pressing issues such as JIT support for more operating systems and bug fixes for the the jre stuff that is already released. Most of the JIT efforts for linux are ragtag at best. There are plenty of improvements that can be made to the existing apis as well, ala AWT/SWING.

    Also, it doesnt seem like it is being opened up, at least not in the way that the blurb implied. The community seems to consist of large corporations that have some sort of stake in java.

    Maybe i missed something, I am tired.... The best news to me is that it isnt owned by micros~1 and that java is getting more press. I probably wont starve anytime soon. Haha.

  • Unfortunately I have to agree with you.

    Usually, I'm an avid Sun supporter, but there's just no way this makes sense. IBM are indeed getting behind Java, and for that they must be congratulated. Their JDK kicks Sun's cleanly and soundly, not that Sun's is a bad one, but IBM's just seems to have more going for it. I use both of them and although there are a lot of things I still prefer about Sun's, IBM's takes the cake.

    I guess that could be part of the reason Sun are so annoyed with them. Showing them up in JDK/JRE development. IBM's Jikes compiler is truly awesome.

    Come on Sun, this doesn't make sense. This is very Microsoftian of you, the way you're treating IBM.

  • IBM not being mentioned may just be an oversight. Your certainly right about the amount of effort they put into Java (they spend more money, time and resources into producing JVMs than Sun do, and they're far quicker). They've been consistantly producing useful tools (Jikes is a god send) and code (see http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/), and seem quite happy to release stuff OpenSource. Coming back to the issue at hand, It's a shame that sun didn't feel it could put Java though the normal standard bodies (whatever the reason), they obviously want to keep as tight a control over the language as possible.
  • With this announcement, Sun has taken the next step in sharing the responsibility for the development of the Java platform with other members of the international technology community. The formation of the ECs also underscores the software industry's dedication to the success of the JCP program and their commitment to ensuring that Java technology continues to rapidly develop in order to meet the needs of the networked economy. Moreover, the additional direction and expertise of the EC members will further assure the Java technology developer community that they will have access to the highest quality technology for .com computing.
  • I don't want to sound *too* inflamatory, but the use of the words "Caldera" and "Open source leaders" in the same sentence doesn't seem very consistent to me. Since when has Caldera ever lead anything anyway ?

    I mean, last time we've heard of Caldera on /. , it was because its CEO was bitching about Open source [slashdot.org]. Makes it kinda tough to say "great, these OSS Good Guys(tm) are in this Java commitee". Apache Software Foundation, yeah right, but Caldera...

    More ontopic : they say in the article that these are interim comimittee who will work on Java specs "until the first general EC election, which is scheduled for later this fall.". Who's gonna vote for that ? Can I vote against Caldera ?

  • We live on a planet that is, as planets often are, shaped roughly as a round ball-like thingy. Not only that, but it tends to whirl around, giving us our praised days and nights. Think about it: I live in Eastern European Timezone. I wake up like, what, seven long hours before U.S. citizens. Not to mention Indian /.'ers (if you think only of american indians here, get a boost on that iq).

    We from the other side of the globe would very much like to see news posted before we have to get to sleep :) so if /. could offer someone in, say, Oz, the ability to post stories, it would be really nice!

  • Sun already [sun.com] provides the code to their various software technology products.

    I think this is a good indication of how big companies are seeing the light in regard to Open Source methodologies. Certainly, I'll agree that the SCSL isn't quite as Open-Source like as the GPL, BSD, or Python licenses, but it shows that the company is willing to go the Open Source route, and with the reputation that Sun has built up, I've no doubt that they will further embrace the Open Source philosophy in the future.

    My feeling is that they're keeping their source code technologies, especially the revolutionary Java, more closed than those of stauncher Open Source models for a while longer, to allow them to mature, before releasing them fully. I have no doubt that this is what they're planning. It's not some evil Corporate Conspiracy like you're suggesting, schwap.

  • MS's stated motto of "Write Once, Crash Everywhere".

    You know, I think it was more, "Crash Once, Write Everywhere". Have you ever looked at what Windows does to memory after a BSOD?
  • It looks like SUN, who is gearing up to be the next industry leader once Micro$oft is broken up, has learned a thing or two about what happens to companies that don't play fair. So, for now, at least, SUN is going to share with their comrades. Even with some of those open-source-hippie-types. Hopefully SUN, despite being a large corporation, will choose to be marginally less evil and selfish then other large corporations.

    On the other hand, Tolkien springs to mind, a little melodramatically: "only one hand can bear the ring" , and if they do, "another dark lord will appear"


  • Probably their comments just didn't arrive in time for press. I can't see how a "yippee! we'er so happy to be here we're at risk of spontaneous combustion!" comment would be important :)

    Why Apache probably is too busy to comment at the moment (from their web site): "The Apache Software Foundation has just begun its reorganization from the Apache Group to a not-for-profit corporation."

  • Certainly Microsoft's implementation of Java is faster than most, but it's somewhat tied to Microsoft's own platforms. IBM's still comes out on top, and my personal second favourite is the Sun implementation, which, admittedly, I still use more than the IBM one in some cases.

  • Oops, sorry :) looks like I missed the whole point of the question, hehe. Guess I just kind of faded into my own internal musings. I guess the best way to speed up Java would be the JIT, or Just In Time, compilers. The JVM, which gives Java its unique WORA advantage, is an unfortunately but neccessary abstraction in the language. Of course you won't be able compare it to C++ in speed/performance, unless that abstraction to the hardware was removed. The next version of gcc [gnu.org]will include gcj, a native Java compiler, I believe.

  • I think what they have done is a big step in the right direction as long as it is controlled by a group or council that is made up of a cross-section of the industry and not just a bunch of Sun people looking out for Sun's interests. This, I think, would allow it to grow into something that progress out of the industries needs not, just Sun'scoporate direction. How many people now are using Java in a enterprise enviroment for critical systems? How many people would be more accepting of it if it were controlled diferently (i.e. the concil thingy)?
  • Mental note: Read article before posting :) (hey it 4:45am)
    Wow this does look GOOD!
  • Hmmmm - its 18:30 where I am

  • I question Sun’s commitment to open standards... (Score:5)

    by ekmo ( 128842 ) on Thursday June 01, 2000 @11:41PM (#1031234)

    Sun walked away from the ISO several months ago because the ISO would not let them retain complete control, including imposing a licensing scheme, on the proposed ISO Java Standard. Sun merely did not want Java established as a standard, but they wanted to supercede the ISO when it came to formulating, monitoring, and enforcing the standard. This would have included huge licensing fees for anyone who used the ``standard''. It was little more than an attempt to get the ISO to become the licensing enforcement arm of Sun. When the ISO said no, Sun walked away.

    So they tried to make an end run around the ISO through the ECMA (until Sun realized that Microsoft was and ECMA member), and now they are apparently forming an Executive Committee, (comprised primarily of corporations, as opposed to developers). If this is supposed to be the Java community-based Process program, where are the real members of the community, the developers!

    Mr. McNealy, you cannot have your cake, and eat it too! Either Java is a copyrighted product, which you are free to license to third parties, or it is a standard. NOT BOTH! This is nothing more than another uncommitted publicity stunt by Sun that will accomplish nothing. Java will remain without standardization.


  • Obligatory Transmeta comment :)

    Certainly, if we have a processor that can be modified to run any processor's code, it could be made to run the JVM "processor's" code. And since it does run-time optimization, it would run the applications faster.

    Sun has been pushing its Java processors, but I haven't heard anything of them for years.

  • Hello all. I just want to make sure that it is clear that this is excellent news. Having the members of the ASF involved with Sun's decision making process at a high level is much better than not having any OSS representation at all at any level. :-) The future of Java on the server side is very bright. Those of you who are complaining about Java being slow have probably never used it on the server side (ie: servlets) which is the part that we are focusing on. It is quite fast and extremely stable and scalable. java.apache.org, jakarta.apache.org and xml.apache.org are the three main Apache projects that are clearly focused on Java technologies. java.apache.org and jakarta.apache.org will eventually be merged together and the entire Apache Project will be a very powerful OSS voice in the Java world. The Jakarta project (which was originally based on software contributed by Sun) has already proven to be extremely successful with >50k downloads of the Tomcat servlet engine per month and a lot of development/user support from the OSS community. Keep an eye on us. We are doing cool things for the OSS world. -jon (a proud member of the ASF)
  • Well, I guess that there are still moder^H^H^H^H^Hpeople who think earth is flat and USofA IS the world... :>

    J.
  • Hmmm, I take it you haven't tried IBM's JDK for Linux -- mixed mode virtual machine with an in-house JIT, and it performs great for me. The Blackdown.org people are working on linux builds of the Sun HotSpot system, which also goes at a pretty respectable speed. Those enough for you?

    Of course, none of this is much reassurance if you're running Linux on Alphas or PowerPCs, but nobody would think of running Linux on non-Intel hardware, would they? ;)

  • We don't need EJB Server representation. There are already 2+ OSS EJB projects out there (I know, I host the CVS and mailing lists for one of them on my machines...JBoss). Not having it directly under the ASF, isn't doing us any harm at all because you can simply download the EJB servers from other locations. Big deal. Also, in my personal opinion only, EJB is a nasty buzz word that IS managers like to throw around. Only about 1% of the entire web application arena really needs it, the rest of the people who are developing on it are kidding themselves and wasting time/resources. It is entirely possible to have 100% stable servlet web applications without the need for the bulk that EJB adds. I wish that more people would wake up and more correctly evaluate the technologies they are using for the applications they are building instead of simply going along with Sun's marketing engine blindfolded. Yes, Sun does make good technologies, but not everyone has to use them for all cases. -jon
  • 1. Microsoft has pulled the plug on its support for VJ++, and it will not appear in the next installment of Visual InterDev. The Rational Corporation [rational.com] is taking over the J++ side of things. 2. Where do you get the idea that MS J++ is widespread use? Just beacause a company has a licence for the MS InterDev, doesn't mean that they use J++. The majority of Java developers that I know of, either use Cafe, or JBuilder. Some of them use vi/emacs and the JDK! 3. Claiming the Jini is dead generally comes from ppl that don't know anything about the technology. Jini is totally new protocol with a new architecture and it is NOT designed for backward compatibility with existing CORBA, RMI or EJB. In short, it is a technology for the future. Hence, many telcos are investigating Jini for future use. ys

  • I have to agree with you that using Transmeta's code-morphing technology and its ability to do software instruction set implementation could be a Big Thing for the robust Java platform. The question is, will a total Java chip include other instruction sets? Java's great, btu unless you had it co-processing with other , more traditional IS's, I don't know how much acceptance it would gain *outside* the staunch Java followers.

    That said, it would be an enourmous speed advantage and potentially ground breaking technology.

  • I think the above post should be moderated up, he make some interesting points.

    what Sun is rightfully afraid of is that Java will go the way of Unix - 57 different flavors, each of which requires a modifications to a Makefile to even compile, much less run. The fact that Microsoft has already attempted to pollute Java is more than enough justification to keep the language centrally managed.

    I would like to make a few points about the above qoute:

    • Java has a very good reason for maintaining control over the java spec. A solid definition of what Java is, is absolutely essential to developers who will be working with this technology, esp in terms of ecommerce and java servlets.
    • Another reason is that Java is designed to be platform independent. It is one of the key points to the architecture of the language. (I my opinion they did a pretty good job). Not maintaining Draconian control over the spec lets companies add proprietary extensions, hence diluting the architecture *coudh* *cough* Microsoft.
    • One of the problems is that Sun might use this Draconian control to extert market dominance over Java. Thus gaining an unfair advantage.
    • This open committee is a good idea is forced Sun to be responsible for technologies changes. It also puts the spotlight on Sun whenever they want to do anything shifty.

    Anyway

  • Haiku (Score:3)

    by 575 ( 195442 ) on Friday June 02, 2000 @01:26AM (#1031245) Journal
    The not in dot com
    They believe Java's open
    Creep silently, strike

  • ku^H^Hmods for that.

  • Darn, that link was correct, but there is a better link: Cygnus's page [cygnus.com]


  • "will a total Java chip include other instruction sets?"

    Quoth Sam&Max:
    "Does it include wanton destruction?"
    "We can only hope."

    I certainly hope they will at some point be able to switch processor contexts quickly. Imagine a combination of Linux/x86 robustness with fast Java applications... and native perl!^)

    Then again, embedded Java... mmm... And you can hardly talk about any kind of "small insider group" with Java. It is slowly making its way.

  • Incorrect (Score:3)

    by Zico ( 14255 ) on Friday June 02, 2000 @02:21AM (#1031249)

    Rational is not taking over J++, they're just producing a Java compiler that will run inside the next Visual Studio, along with, as their press release even mentioned, "Visual Basic, Visual C++, and Visual J++." (Yet another reason not to rely on Slashdot headlines for your information, although at least they didn't claim that Rational was also taking over VB and VC++.) You should know that ActiveSt ate is doing the same thing [activestate.com], joining the VS Integration Program so that Perl and Python will be integrated with the next version of Visual Studio. (Oh, and it's kinda silly to say that J++ isn't in widespread use.)

    Cheers,
    ZicoKnows@hotmail.com

  • Seeing is believing. By the way I don't really think it's true, Java simply lacks the ability to express some things. For example when using containers in Java you always have to cast (and check the type), in C++ you may use templates which avoids this cast. If you add garbage collection to C++ (which can be done [hp.com]) Java is (nearly) a subset of C++ so I don't see where Java has advantages; you could even use bytecode und JIT for C++ if you meant to do so (can't find the link but someone made a proof-of-concept compiler to the JVM).
    The main advantage of Java is a well defined class library (especially the GUI) which is missing from C++ but that's a different matter, the _language_ Java is nothing special (in my opinion at least)
  • I remember awhile back though there was some flap about sun withdrawing Java from the standards process. Have they changed their position, or is this just a media trick?

    The flap was about totally submitting control of the Java spec to an official international committee (ISO maybe? Something like that anyway). The new deal lets Sun keep a (hopefully) benevolent dictatorship over the process.

    One issue with an ISO type committee is that they tend to be very slow - how often has the C++ spec been updated? Twice? This encourages compiler vendors to come up with proprietary extensions to meet developers' needs. Java is currently moving far faster than an ISO committee could possibly handle.
  • I believe it was a copyright issue. ECMA wanted to own the copyrights on all the documents that Sun submitted - and would then pass ownership of those copyrights to ISO.

    Sun had spent years developing those documents (and making them freely available on the web), and didn't want to give them up.

  • Following up on my own post, you can find Sun's official spin on it here [sun.com].

  • to have Steve Woston on the panel. I mean, after his *really* important contributions to the world standard Google, this is a severe oversight and should be corrected. Glad to see that he will be helping out on Doom III though.
  • Sure, you can add Java features to C++. You can also add C++ features to Java (like the template work that Sun is doing), but that misses the point.

    I want to be able to write simple applications that work on a variety of operating systems. Stability, development speed and flexibility are more important to me than raw execution speed, so I'd rather develop in Java. Having a huge standard library is a great help, but it's not the only reason I choose Java over C++.
  • Sun has drawn a lot of fire for its stance towards open source. But I believe they have a (valid) reason for what they do. Remember Joy was one of the original BSD guys. He understands free software. While Java is very powerful and used in many places for many things, it is still in the "proving grounds" stage of its development to many (witness a new version every 8 months or so). It is not ready to be decentralized and exposed to the world at large yet. There are still some rather big sharks out there that would like nothing more than to take all of Sun's work (which has been for the most part just "given away" - specs, implementations, documentation, etc.) and run with it...branch it, assimilate it, extinguish it. Java is not ready for the possibility of being branched into many flavors. For a while more I think Sun is correct in keeping Java under central control while it's in its nascent stage. I don't know much about ISO, but couldn't ISO decide that we just needed /this/ little feature or /that/ little feature in Java? There are major features currently in development - like genericity/parameterized types. These things haven't crystallized yet. Sun already has published specs which are enough (AFAIK) to make your own implementation, and nobody is stopping you. Sun is forming this committee from companies it trusts and has worked with closely. I don't see what's wrong with that. I think sometimes we doth protest too much.
  • Buying VJ++ from Microsoft is like buying life insurance from a mortician. He might be useful to you for awhile, but his long term goal isn't yours.

    Since VJ++ is stuck at Java 1.1, people who were once foolish enough to believe there was a future in a Java IDE from a company that despises Java seem to be migrating away from it. There are better products out there now.

    What's the use of a nice standard if there is no easy way to get it into the hands of the end user? The problem seems to be in getting the Java 2 platform on an end user machine (without having to cajole them into downloading a 5Mb plug-in). There are swing applets yearning to be free.

    Even better would be forcing Microsoft to put OJI into IE. Yeah, that's going to happen.
  • Take a look at this:

    http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/wadler/gj/index. html

  • It's a shame that a lot of the free stuff on Alphaworks is not open source at all, and indeed comes with a license even more restrictive than for Microsoft production products - must destroy the products after 60 days, evaluation use only, etc.
  • "Oh, and it's kinda silly to say that J++ isn't in widespread use."

    I think that the most you can say about J++ is that it has been widely distributed, since it is distributed with Visual Studio with VB, VC++, etc. However, I have seen very little evidence that there is much usage of J++. Part of this is aversion to anything Microsoft, part of this is due to standards non-compliance, some of this is due to non-support of Java 1.2.
  • SCSL released code isn't very useful, because of heavy licensing restrictions. About the only thing it is definitely useful for is security analysis. That's an improvement, certainly - you don't need to take their word for it that it's secure, you can check the source code yourself.

    But remember, they also have released stuff as true open source, like http://jakarta.apache.org [apache.org] which they donated to the Apache Software Foundation. There are quite a few projects springing up on there, actually, but the orginal ones they donated were jakarta-tomcat (implementation of the servlet spec), jakarta-tools, and Ant (cool build tool, much easier to use than Make!). That alone deserves some kudos IMO.

  • True, but one can hope that that's a temporary problem. Just throw enough people at it. It's not a broken platform, just broken implementations.
  • And oddly enough, as a coder in the USA I keep the same schedule!
  • IBM flirt with Free Software occasionally, but it's not the way they generally do business. They give a lot of stuff away, in a free beer sense, but only because it can get you in a position to buy some of the stuff that makes them money - things like DB2, etc. But in a Free Speech sense, the only things that spring to mind are their collaborations with the Apache group in XSLT stuff, and the Jikes compiler.

    More power to them, I guess. I'm not RMS. Whether a company frees its code is entirely up to the company. Their half-hearted Linux support disappoints me, on the other hand. Websphere's still a major version behind, and you can't get VAJava Enterprise Edition at all.

    Alphaworks is a special case. The licenses are stricter than production products because they're _not_ production products. It's alpha software. You get to play with it, but on the understanding that next month it may suddenly have become a commercial product, or it may no longer be being developed at all. So the site is neat if you want to scrounge new toys from the bleeding edge, but don't use it for anything serious.

    [offtopic] My favourite IBM free-beer package at the moment is their developer program where you can book in to spend time testing your apps on Big IBM Boxen. It looks pretty cool for those of us who can't afford an AS/400, or who don't have the resources to do huge load tests.
    --
  • It is no surprise to me to see Calera and Apache in there. Both of them are very friendly to proprietary software (Caldera even sells it directly) and have no commercial conflicts with Sun. I notice you don't see Transvirtual, Red Hat, or the Free Software Foundation in there anywhere. It looks to me like Sun has surrounded itself with people it knows will be friendly to its positions.
  • I don't think we'll see Java open-sourced under the GPL anytime soon just because the Apache Software Foundation has a seat on the Executive Committee.

    I think they would be more likely to ask for an Apache-style license. :) Now that would be sweet!

  • Three interesting websites:
    http://java.apache.org/
    http://jakarta.apache.org/
    http://xml.apache.org/

    The Jakarta project includes the servlet engine Tomcat, which is partially based on Sun's old servlet engine, and Apache's servlet engine JServ.

    The cocoon framework (http://xml.apache.org) was founded by Stefano Mazzocchi (who rocks BTW), who has his say in the JSDK and JSP specs. Apache has lots of interesting Java projects in the making, I'm not at all surprised to see them in the committee. I believe IBM supports the Jakarta project as well, I know that Xerces is based on their XML4J XML. Xerces is now an Apache project, and is the parser shipped with Cocoon. IBM creates a tremendous amount of delicious Java (related) software, I think they couldn't care less, whether they get quoted or not, as long as they have their say in the business.

    Also see http://jakarta.apache.org/credits/whoweare.html

  • I'm not sure he understands Free software *apart* form BSD-style free. He complains that releasing java as true open source would mean Microsoft could corrupt the standard, but he hasn't acknowldged that if he were to GPL the source code then any changes microsoft make would *have* to be released, thus preventing any "corruption" they could try...
  • The IETF and ISO have it right. They use groups of people, not companies. Just trotting out a list of companies doesn't do anything. Who is being assigned from each of them? Anyone with a clue, or that new guy no one likes? Blah. This is going to be a press release machine, not a meaningful group.
  • are major features currently in development - like genericity/parameterized types. These things haven't crystallized yet. Sun already has published specs which are enough (AFAIK) to make your own implementation, and nobody is stopping you.

    Can you point me to those specs? I can't find anything on Sun's Java site.
  • The authorities in British Columbia have offered to do a deal with Microsoft.

    Well folks, there you have it. Any last doubt of the B.C. government having a deal with the devil should be completely eliminated.

    Coming from the B.C. lower mainland myself, where could they move? Burnaby? Richmond? (As the building is destroyed in th eearthquake and the soil liquifies). Chilliwack? Victoria?

    My personal vote: Fort Saint John... (about 1000 miles NE of Vancouver.. :)

    Worst possible scenario: Stanley Park.

    Reading further...

    Gordon Wilson!?! Attracting Microsoft to B.C. That does it. We're all doomed...

    ;)

    Trevor, from B.C., Canada
  • OK, the open committee might be OK. But why not an ISO standards group? That would be completely separate from Java.
  • Good point. IBM has all but taken over 1.1. Hmm, maybe they didn't want to be involved with Java 2.

    Even more interesting: the IDE community is represented by Borland. This bypasses Oracle (their IDE is based on Borland-licensed code, but is a separate product) and Symantec, both big Sun partners.

  • Cor blimey mate, that's a bloody good idea![/oz]

    Ahem.

    Honestly, having /. posters in other timezones would only be for the good. Slashdot is a creature of the Internet; it could take advantage of the different timezones and make a bug into a feature :).

  • Their JDK kicks Sun's cleanly and soundly, not that Sun's is a bad one, but IBM's just seems to have more going for it.

    To be fair, Sun generally produces reference implementations for their JDKs where speed and accuracy of development, not performance, is the key factor. The exception to this is Solaris where at one point JDK on Solaris was the most scalable around in terms of threads (IIRC).

    But yeah, IBM's Java stuff is great.

  • How about Java Language Specs [sun.com] and JVM Specs [sun.com].

    Of course, even if the published specifications are complete and consistent enough to let you write your own implementation (believe me, I haven't tried), being able to call the result "Java(tm)" is something else entirely.

    --Seen

  • No, I was interested in genericity and how it is supposed to be integrated in Java. Maybe I misunderstood the original poster.
  • The flap was about totally submitting control of the Java spec to an official international committee (ISO maybe? Something like that anyway). The new deal lets Sun keep a (hopefully) benevolent dictatorship over the process. What do you mean hopefully? Its never a good idea to let any company maintain a dictatorship over a technology that will be broadly used. Part of the reason C++ is as popular as it is - is because its a standardized language. Without open discussion and input from multiple parties - you would have one entity guiding the language in any direction they feel - and this direction is usually towards facilitating the sale and development of their own products. That's why standard bodies exist! In this particular case, i find it amusing that Sun would like Java to become a standard but is very cautious to do so out of fear that they would lose their current autocratic control. Although i don't deny that some standards exist in the control of a private/corporate party, the majority (and popular) of standards are the result of open forums and standardization bodies. One issue with an ISO type committee is that they tend to be very slow - how often has the C++ spec been updated? Twice? This encourages compiler vendors to come up with proprietary extensions to meet developers' needs. Java is currently moving far faster than an ISO committee could possibly handle I disagree here. While it is true that you have a lot of political infighting that occurs in standards committies (as each company involved tries to manipulate (or work in some proprietary royalty oriented IP) the standard to its own advantage) - and as a result you have a lot of blocking that occurs because no one agrees, i think the reason (in the case of) the c++ spec hasn't been updated as often as you claim (i have no knowledge of how often its been updated) is probably because there really isn't anything that needs changed. How long has it been around now? ... [since the early 80's?]
  • The flap was about totally submitting control of the Java spec to an official international committee (ISO maybe? Something like that anyway). The new deal lets Sun keep a (hopefully) benevolent dictatorship over the process.
    What do you mean hopefully? Its never a good idea to let any company maintain a dictatorship over a technology that will be broadly used. Part of the reason C++ is as popular as it is - is because its a standardized language. Without open discussion and input from multiple parties - you would have one entity guiding the language in any direction they feel - and this direction is usually towards facilitating the sale and development of their own products. That's why standard bodies exist! In this particular case, i find it amusing that Sun would like Java to become a standard but is very cautious to do so out of fear that they would lose their current autocratic control. Although i don't deny that some standards exist in the control of a private/corporate party, the majority (and popular) of standards are the result of open forums and standardization bodies.

    One issue with an ISO type committee is that they tend to be very slow - how often has the C++ spec been updated? Twice? This encourages compiler vendors to come up with proprietary extensions to meet developers' needs. Java is currently moving far faster than an ISO committee could possibly handle
    I disagree here. While it is true that you have a lot of political infighting that occurs in standards committies (as each company involved tries to manipulate (or work in some proprietary royalty oriented IP) the standard to its own advantage) - and as a result you have a lot of blocking that occurs because no one agrees, i think the reason (in the case of) the c++ spec hasn't been updated as often as you claim (i have no knowledge of how often its been updated) is probably because there really isn't anything that needs changed. How long has it been around now? ... [since the early 80's?]

  • No, it's not a temporary problem. Nor, of course, is it an inherently broken platform - if it were, then I wouldn't be working on it. But it's not something that's likely to go away, for a number of reasons.

    Firstly, any program the size of a JVM is going to have bugs. And due to the nature of these things, they'll be different bugs on different platforms. Which you may have to work around on those platforms. This is a problem that I've come across with real-world applications, and that even applies across different versions of the same JVM.

    Secondly, in some cases the Java language spec is not tight enough to guarantee WORA. It can't be: there are some things that just won't work the same on all platforms. These will always lead to the potential of an obscure 'feature' which causes your program to fail on some Java platforms, but not others. Again, in theory it's possible for this to take place across multiple versions of the same JVM.

    Does this make Java's multiplatform capabilities useless? No, of course not - it's still <EM>easier</EM> to write multiplatform applications than in most other languages. But you need to test them on all platforms you plan to deploy on, rather than assuming that the magical promise of WORA will get you by. 99% of the time it will, but you can bet that the customer's only going to remember that 1% where your program suddenly goes wrong...
  • http://java.sun.com/aboutJava/communityprocess/jsr /jsr_014_gener.html

Slashdot Top Deals

Hackers are just a migratory lifeform with a tropism for computers.

Close