OpenJDK projects promoting proprietary builds

[Kelly O'Hair]

David Herron wrote:
> Unless something has changed since I left the OpenJDK project isn't
> publishing binary builds.

My understanding too. OpenJDK projects are source only.

> 
> The situation when I was still there was JDK builds were being published but
> not OpenJDK builds.

Correct as far as I know too.

> 
> That was a conscious decision to not do so.

Yup.

> 
> Mebbe the JDK7 build announcements shouldn't be published on OpenJDK mailing
> lists for the same reason as I stopped (last fall) sending DLJ announcements
> to OpenJDK mailing lists?

I tend to agree.

-kto

> 
> - David Herron
> http://davidherron.com
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp.org> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Geir,
>>
>> On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 13:06 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>> On May 29, 2009, at 12:56 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>> Imagine!  There's a downside for giving sun complete copyright (via
>>> joint assignment)!  Whoda thought!
>> Of course. That is a reason to think long and hard before signing the
>> SCA in its current form, if you wish to do that. But that is a different
>> issue. What Sun does with its own internal proprietary forks is their
>> business. This is about OpenJDK project themselves publishing and
>> promoting proprietary builds, which IMHO is not done.
>>
>>>> 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).
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>