Hacked OpenJDK

[John Yeary]

Agreed.

I don't like inflammatory items on the mailing lists I am on. I want people
to focus on topic like everyone else I am sure.

It is one thing to have a "hot" issue like closures, continuations, etc.
where people may have opinions, but another to make dross remarks.

John
____________________________

John Yeary
____________________________

<http://javaevangelist.blogspot.com/>  <https://twitter.com/jyeary>
<http://www.youtube.com/johnyeary>
  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jyeary>
<https://plus.google.com/112146428878473069965>
  <http://www.facebook.com/jyeary>
<http://feeds.feedburner.com/JavaEvangelistJohnYearysBlog>
  <http://netbeans.org/people/84414-jyeary>
____________________________

"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even
though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who
neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight
that knows not victory nor defeat."
-- Theodore Roosevelt



On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 02/13/2012 03:12 PM, John Yeary wrote:
> > I spoke with Frans via IM. I don't believe that he is trying to be
> > problematic. I don't think he was getting what the project is about. I
> also
> > think he is concerned (based on our chat), that he doesn't want to
> promote
> > OpenJDK in companies, and education if there is a fear of lawsuits. The
> > question was not phrased, or framed very well.
> >
> > I would like to focus the project on the task at hand, and avoid any
> flame
> > wars. I don't think it is constructive to do so.
> >
> > We have a great opportunity to work as a worldwide team of developers to
> > make a difference. Please don't forget that.
>
> Fair enough, but I think that any approach to this list that begins
> with "If I ship Java with a nonstandard API, will Oracle sue me?" will
> not get a good response.  It's a question that reminds everyone of
> Microsoft's "Embrace, extend and extinguish."  It took quite a lot for
> Sun to come around to the idea that it was safe to free Java, partly
> because the community just wasn't interested in incompatible variants.
>
> Andrew.
>