ESR Responds to Sun's Claims of Being a Better Bazaar 310
UnixSphere writes "Sun has been quoted to have said, 'Sun's Java is developed more in the mode of the bazaar than Linux is,' which has prompted OSI President Eric Raymond to correct Sun's view of what open source really is."
Not sure about Bazaar, but it seems Bizarre (Score:3, Interesting)
Execs Getting Noticed (Score:2, Insightful)
Nothing more nothing less.
Re:Java (Score:5, Insightful)
If I was an American (god forbid) and Sun WAS to open source Java after spending all that time in court with Microsoft regarding their aforementioned forking, I'd say the appropriate thing to do would be to chase them down with pitchforks and torches for wasting so much taxpayer money.
Re:Java (Score:4, Insightful)
A nice, DFSG-compliant, GPL-compatible license would make all of our lives easier and a fork wouldn't be necessary.
Re:Java (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Java (Score:5, Interesting)
This is interesting.
Java is prohibited from forking because Sun controls what is Java.
Linux is deterred from forking because it has the support of the community.
If Linux's management goes awry, then it will likely fork and spawn something with decent management. For example XFree86's X.org fork. This is good for the community. If Sun's management goes awry, the community must accept it. In other words, you are relying on the company to make the correct decisions.
I just thought this was an interesting perspective, and that I would share.
Re:Java (Score:3, Interesting)
Right.
But, in the eyes of Sun, new implementations should be worse than forks based on the same original source, right?
Wasn't that obnoxious Microsoft "fork" a new implementation, as well?
Re:Java (Score:2)
probably because of this
2.Pathces(sic) that I have submitted to various Java projects have been implemented
oh, how can you submit a patch without source. Java is not open sourced.
ok, so point me to where i can download the source for jre and sdk
Re:Java (Score:2)
href=http://apache.mirrors.pair.com/httpd
Re:Java (Score:2)
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/source_l
Upcoming version:
https://j2se.dev.java.net/
Re:Java (Score:2)
SCSL Binaries - needed to complete source build
where's the source for those?
Oh that's right some of the source is all you need.
Re:Java (Score:2)
The following groups/people have AS MUCH SAY as Sun on the J2EE/J2SE:
Apache Software Foundation
Apple
BEA Systems
Borland
Fujitsu Limited
Google
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
IONA Technologies
Intel
JBoss
Doug Lea
Nortel Networks
Oracle
SAP
These groups/people have as much say as Sun on the J2ME:
Ericsson Mobile Platforms
IBM
Intel
Matsushita
Motorola
Noki a
NTT DoCoMo
Orange France
Philips
Research In Motion
Sams
Re:Java (Score:5, Insightful)
See response to point 4.
--->8--<snip more tiresome crap>--->8---
The JCP has f'ing NOTHING to do with whether or not Java is Open Source. The license does. The JCP is a fine and good thing. Open Source Java would be a better thing. How blindingly ignorant. As long as JFC is BSD or LGPL or has an appropriate special case statement in its license, there would be no legal downside to using Java for development if the rest were GPL.But, more importantly, BSD and MIT are both Open Source licenses. Do you even read what you're typing?
What I would consider to be an appropriate way to Open Source Java would be to place the tools (javac, java, javap, etc.) under GPL, and the libraries under a modified LGPL or BSD (to ensure that there are no legal issues with the dynamic type of linking that Java does). I'd be just as happy if it were all put under a BSD style license, but, given the amount of resources that Sun has put into it so far, I'd say it's a bit more reasonable to do it the way I've outlined.
Re:Java (Score:3, Insightful)
"Sun can vapor on about voting and committees all it wants, but at the end of the day JCP is still a single point of control, the Java reference implementation and class libraries are under a proprietary license, and nobody can legally fork them," Raymond wrote. "As long as that continues to be the case, Java will be firmly stuck in cathedral-land and any claim otherwise will be disingenuous crap."
The forking is
Re:Java (Score:3, Interesting)
It is really disappointing to me that the GPL-advocates insist that Java isn't free and/or open-source.
That's because it isn't free or open source. It would be kinda cool if it was, but it isn't.
1) People assume that Apache is open-source
That's because it is. Not all the stuff is GPL compatable, but it is Open source.
2) Apache has a single point of control
The Apache project has the most influence on Apache projects, yes. But they don't control their projects the way Sun controls Java.
3
The freeBSD license (Score:2, Insightful)
What Java needs is a freeBSD license. One where companies who can improve the code has the right to sell it, with a pointer to the free non-improved source.
The free version would improve to catch up with commercial versions, and the commecial versions would be viable (no GPL virus effect).
Re:Java (Score:2, Informative)
You don't need to care that a product is GPL licensed if you're only using it - you can do so without accepting the license.
If that story is true, the people you worked for were either badly-informed, or confused about the difference between copying and distributing, or "religious zealots" with some non-business-related reason to d
Re:Java (Score:2)
It's still a hassle to install and work with Java on weird architectures. That's a big practical reason.
There are a lot of social/political reasons, some of which the JCP solves and some it doesn't. [jcp.org]
One more thing... (Score:2)
What I do mind is obnoxious licenses limiting the freedom of end-users and hobbyists. They could very well be using the same process they're using today, but release their code (and specifications) under a free license.
Re:Java (Score:3, Interesting)
2) Apache has a single point of control
3) The JCP has an elected board that is in control
4) Apache has as much control as Sun on that board
Did you read the FA? Can you fork Apache, thus taking the source and start your own version? If yes, then it's open source, if no, then it isn't.
5) Patches that I have submitted to the Ant project were never even discussed, let alone integrated
Same here. Can you say to the Ant project to shove it and start YourAnt, usin
Re:Java (Score:2)
Re:Java (Score:2)
Re:Java (Score:2)
But you can't really compare what Microsoft did with Java to a typical open-source fork. In the latter case, the object is to create better software: the user is free to choose which branch of the forked software he or she feels is superior. Or, for that matter
Re:Java (Score:3, Insightful)
Open sourcing java cannot lead to a fork... are you retarded? That is one of the top reasons ppl that prefer open source software do prefer it, because you C
OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2, Interesting)
Sun likes to cast these issues as "Sun+OSS vs. Microsoft" because it's good marketing, b
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you think the acceptance of 'Linux on the Desktop' would have been on the level it is now, without OpenOffice / StarOffice? None of the attempts (do I hear Munchen) to wipe MS from the typical office desktop would have had any success without Sun's StarOffice or OOo. In my book that is relevance to the market.
The same can of course be said about Ximian (Novell) or Mozilla (Netscape/AOL), but what are HP's or IBM's contributions to the Linux world, without which Linux wouldn't have made it? Still, the
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2)
Sun management must be asking themselves: where are we going to be five years from now? I think they see their hardware business failing, they don't control OpenOffice anymore, and they realize that few people care about Solaris. In fact, if StarOffice/OpenOffice showed them anything, it showed them that when they release something as open source, they won't be able to keep u
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2)
Not an independent company if they don't get their house in order and FAST.
Personally I think they should have dropped Solaris 4 years ago, but that option may now be too late to persue. Whatever they do, they had better get MOVING.
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2)
You have answered your own question:
None of the attempts to wipe MS from the typical office desktop would have had any success without Sun's StarOffice or OOo.
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I think it would. OK, maybe a few months behind. But if the whole community got behind KOffice, which is better integrated (Yes only with one desktop suite, but one is better than none, and fo
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2)
if the whole community got behind KOffice, which is better integrated (Yes only with one desktop suite, but one is better than none, and for Linux on the Desktop to be a success you only need to get KDE accepted), less resource hungry
Well, as I'm sure you know, many people don't use KDE. For those that don't loading KOffice would also load a lot of KDE libraries that wouldn't have been using system recourses otherwise. So, it would be just as bloated as
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2)
Woah, bad assumption! The fact that OpenOffice.org has a freely available Windows version is exactly the reason it's the dominant OSS office suite, IMHO. You can wax lyrical about Linux on the desktop all you want, but as of right now:
Re:OSS and Sun are on different sides (Score:2)
... which are absolutely critical to achieving the network effect necessary for a viable alternative to MSO. I use Word right now because it meets my needs and everyone with whom I exchange documents uses it. I don't know many Linux users, but I know plenty of Windows and OS X users. For Linux to make it on the desktop, it has to work with systems that are already deployed.
Maybe if OOo didn't exist KOffice would have been ported to other platforms. But I disagree with your contenti
Sun's software was certainly bazaar originated (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Not sure about Bazaar, but it seems Bizarre (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's how the concerned sides act to each other in a very simplified manner:
Open Source community about Microsoft: Shared Source isn't Open Source, but thanks for the instaler. Your closed source sucks because there are too few eyes.
Open Source community about Sun: It would be nice if you would decide where you really stand, but thanks for OpenOffice.org. Your closed source could be better with more eyes.
Sun about Microsoft: We would like to get some of the money you are getting from your monopoly-like marketshare, but you have shown that you can not be trusted.
Sun about Open Source: Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Microsoft about Open Source: We like the BSD, we don't like copyleft.
Microsoft about Sun: Buzz off or we will crush you.
Re:Not sure about Bazaar, but it seems Bizarre (Score:2)
Nope. In reality, there are no sides; this either white or black, either good or evil view doesn't apply.
Most companies which behave friendly towards the free software community in one way, for which they should be applauded, also are hostile towards the same community in another way, for which they should be criticized. For example, the laudable fact that Sun has given us OpenOffice shouldn't stop us from criticizing the not so friendly things they also do.
Bazaar or .... (Score:3, Funny)
Enough already! (Score:2)
Re:Enough already! (Score:2)
Well there's a shocker (Score:2, Informative)
"Why is this?" you might ask. It's governed by the simple fact that ESR has nothing better to spend his prodigious amounts of free time on than the literary equivalent of listening to himself speak. I really wish Slashdot wouldn't encourage this guy by posting a story about him, because he really does
JCP is anything but open (Score:5, Interesting)
Certainly a cathedral model.
Re:JCP is anything but open (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok, let me get this straight...
Sun's model is cathedral like because you had to fill and fax a form?!
Re:JCP is anything but open (Score:2)
Sun's model is cathedral like because you had to fill and fax a form?!
Yes. With open source projects, things like a compatability toolkit would just be a download link off the main page. No forms, NDAs, signatures, etc. needed.
I'm not saying filling out such a form is a terrible burden, but that's not the point.
Re:JCP is anything but open (Score:3, Insightful)
It's because of the terms and conditions, such as this in Exhibit A-1 on Page 15 in fine print:
b. License to Modifications. Any modifications to the TCK made by Licensee pursuant to the previous paragraph which Licensee makes available to Sun are hereby licensed to Sun under Licensee's applicable intellectual property rights on an "AS IS" basis without restriction and without charge. Sun may choose to use or not use such modifications
MOD PARENT DOWN (Score:3, Insightful)
Or you may not.
And we don't know what the poster's presumed signature on the form legally encumbers him with in terms of secrecy or liability.
And the form isn't necessarily even the license, as we don't know the NDA status from reading the post you so glibly discard.
Funny thing about language, especially legal language, _ALL_ the words count and the words that are missing cannot be meaningfully g
Its progress... (Score:2)
One, TCKs free to 'qualified' projects. That means OSS projects run by not for profit orgs.
Two, TCKs for a fee to companies developing OSS implementations. So JBoss can be certified, but they do have to pay lots of $$ for the right.
Its better than before, but still imperfect. Only once the Java runtime TCK is opened up for GNU classpath to be tested against it, will we be truly free.
The ot
Re:JCP is anything but open (Score:2)
Perhaps you misunderstand that every single person reading Slashdot can join the JCP for free, and sit on the board with Sun, having the EXACT amount of control Sun has?
Or perhaps you are a M$ h4x0r and don't want them to know who y
Free Forking? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't like the linux kernel you can take the code, make your own kernel, and even break whatever standards you want....Linus isn't going to drag you to court for breaking the POSIX standard or something.
Can the same be said or Java? In fact parts of it are still under a propietary license as the article states...so people who live in glass houses.....
Re:Free Forking? (Score:5, Informative)
When Microsoft implemented J++, they touted it as Java, but it lacked many features that became standard in Java, like Swing. Including their own VM with Windows made users think they had Java, when they didn't, such that Swing applets couldn't be generally deployed for years.
I'm not defending Sun's claim that Java is more open than Linux, just that they had every right and every duty to keep Microsoft from fucking Java up for all of us.
Re:Free Forking? (Score:2)
... which only confirms that Java should be protected from forks in the domain of trademark law. Additionally protecting it in the domain of copyright law seems stupid.
Re:Free Forking? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sun went after Microsoft because they had a contractual agreement which stated they had to produce a product with certain attributes before they can call it "Java".
Sun has never prevented alternative Java implementation, there are many [java-virtual-machine.net].
As far as open-source there is Kaffe [kaffe.org], GNU Classpath [gnu.org], GCJ [gnu.org], Jikes [ibm.com] and others.
All those projects need h
Re:Free Forking? (Score:4, Informative)
That's not really the same. Microsoft signed a licensing agreement with Sun to use and develop Java in Windows. One stipulation of the agreement was that their implementation had to comply with Java standard commands and protocols. Microsoft tried "embrace, extend, and extinguish" with Java by introducing more commands in their version than standard Java. That was Sun's main beef and this was all brought out during the antitrust trial.
James Gosling testified that MS had 2 non standard commands and did not meet Sun's compatibility requirements as dictated by agreement. MS lawyers tried to paint Sun as jealous that MS created a faster, better version of Java. Gosling responded that Sun didn't care if the MS version was faster or better only that it was compatible.
Gosling said incompatibility across different platforms was against the "write once, run anywhere" goal that Sun had wanted for Java. Incompatibility across platforms he said was what made C and C++ hard to program across different machines and fractured those languages. He wrote Java in part "from the scars that I acquired in doing C porting."
Re:Free Forking? (Score:2)
That was before the JCP, and before people like Apache had as much say as Sun in the Java Process.
Now, they just know that they can't trust M$. Does anyone here disagree about that fact?
And you are right, Linus won't take you to court for making one that isn't compatible. Might bad mouth you, but as long as you choose GPL (instead of MIT or BSD) you are fine. But how dare y
Re:Free Forking? (Score:2)
If you go to the mall (I suppose this is the modern equivalent of a bazaar) you will see some stores that are less popular than other stores. It doesn't mean they have any less right to be there than other stores -- as long as they pay their bills on time, mall management probably couldn't care less.
Re:Free Forking? (Score:2)
Ok, where is it? (Score:2)
I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:2)
If there is a fork, doesn't that present huge problems for the development community?
And since Java is an interpretted (kind of) language, doesn't that pose a problem with compatibility?
At least with C, you have the benefit of compiling. With Java, you are compiling to java bytecode, which is still interpretted, and still prone to problems between the forks.
I guess you kind of experience this problem with shar
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:2)
Why should it?
You use a library that implements an API, you use the library. You decide the library's not quite the way you want it, you implement the diffs you require and send them back upstream for potential inclusion; alternatively, you fork it and go.
And here's the crucial bit: if enough other people think your fork is worthwhile, they'll follow you.
And why on earth would we want to compile anything statically?
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:5, Interesting)
Up to now, very few APIs have been proprietary. Sun has broken new ground by successfully asserting a high level of control over the Java APIs (not just their implementation).
If there is a fork, doesn't that present huge problems for the development community?
Languages like C, C++, Fortran, Perl, shell, and Python have all thrived in the absence of the level of control that Sun is trying to exercise. The reason is simple market economics: implementations that don't provide the features that users want disappear on their own.
Sun is trying to substitute their own interests for the wisdom and preferences of their end users. They are churning out one API after another, but users have no choice but to build on what Sun ships; even if there were alternative implementations, users would still be forced to accept whatever garbage Sun and the JCP dream up.
At least with C, you have the benefit of compiling. With Java, you are compiling to java bytecode, which is still interpretted, and still prone to problems between the forks.
Modern C programs have numerous shared library dependencies; Java's byte-code based system would, if anything, be more robust.
I guess you kind of experience this problem with shared libraries under *NIX, but at least you have the possibility for static compiling. You are stuck with the JRE for Java, no?
You are only stuck with the JRE for Java because Sun keeps you from having a choice. If Java were an open standard, there would be dozens of different implementations, and those implementations would work out amongst themselves what features were important core features and what features were vendor-specific extensions.
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason many people don't equate this with Microsoft tactics is that Microsoft hatred is all about protecting the value of guild crafts and nothing about principle. Windows hatred is simply the modern equivalent of the hatred the Cobol and Fortran camps had of C. The future really hurts when it threatens to make your own skills obsolete.
On Java it was Sun who were being the evil proprietary monopolists. Their objective was to reduce every platform to the level of Solaris, leveling down, not up. Suns approach was "If you dare do anything that I can't I'll sue you."
Java could have been the future of computing but there is no way that any company, let alone a declining company like Sun can be trusted with the complete control they demand. The chances of Sun ending up in a SCO like position in five years time are significant.
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:3, Interesting)
I think the analogy is apt, but backwards. The Cobol/Fortran and C camps had mutual dislike. Cobol/Fortran represented entrenched, well-paid, proprietary interests. It was the analog of Microsoft today. C represented the slightly chaotic, open, non-proprietary alternative, like Linux today. And today, the dislike between Microsof
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:2, Insightful)
You so completely 'don't get' what the grandparent typed that it's almost overwhelming, trying to figure out what you meant.
Microsoft is not the 'guild craft' movement. Microsoft is the modern factory, trying to replace the guild craftsmen.
It's pointless arguing the other points you typed a lot of words about, if you can't get that part. It's almost like you feel 'bad thing' can be interchangably plugged in w
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:2)
You so completely 'don't get' what the grandparent typed that it's almost overwhelming, trying to figure out what you meant.
Irony is not the iron version of goldy, you know.
To spell it out for you:
What about GCJ and Kaffe and others? (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah right! Magical open-source developers will come out of nowhere right?
If you want open-source Java, and feel serious about helping out, then you have GCJ [gnu.org] and Kaffe [kaffe.org].
Sun has allowed alternative JVMs for a long time and there are now many other JVMs [java-virtual-machine.net] to choose from.
You have your opportunity you develop Open-source Java, put your time and money where your mouth is, support Kaffe [kaffe.org] today!
Or do you just want to freeload off Sun's investement in their JVM?... Even if they already provide it for free.
Re:What about GCJ and Kaffe and others? (Score:2)
If Sun followed through on their original promise and made Java an open standard that anybody can implement, Microsoft would ship Microsoft Java again, IBM would ship the RVM with SWT, and lots more commercial vendors would ship their favorite Java ipmlementations. It's Sun's ownership of the Java standard that keeps that from happening.
If you want open-source Java, and feel serious about helping out, then you have GCJ and Kaffe.
Re:What about GCJ and Kaffe and others? (Score:2)
Re:What about GCJ and Kaffe and others? (Score:2)
All JSRs will allow for development and distribution of compatible independent implementations.
So, ummm, what is everyone complaining about? Every single JSR that the JCP works on REQUIRES the ability for people to make compatible independent implementations.... Oh I know, they want to make non-compatible versions like M$ did!
Re:What about GCJ and Kaffe and others? (Score:2)
Yes, exactly. It is the ability to make incompatible implementations that is missing from Java.
That's a problem for two reasons. First, "compatibility" is determined by Sun, which effectively gives them unilateral control over who gets to implement Java. So, even compatibl
Re:I'm not sure how I feel about this (Score:2)
Oh, so what you are saying is that you have never actually programmed Java? See, here's is why I can make that assumption.
If you wish to use JMS, then do so. If you wish to use J
Time to trademark Open Source (Score:2)
Re:Time to trademark Open Source (Score:3, Insightful)
Freedom of speech means letting other people say offensive or blatantly wrong things. Being a supporter of such means you have to support their right to say it no matter how wrong (in almost ever
Neither is really a bazaar (Score:4, Insightful)
There are large barriers to doing that from both the Linux kernel and from Sun. A more bazaar like example is CPAN or sorceforge. Anybody who creates something coherent can have it published there for everyone to use.
Java and Linux are much more limiting. You can't "hawk your wares" in either case. That said, I don't think this should be absolute...more like a scale. Linux is closer to the bazaar than Java, I think.
Re:Neither is really a bazaar (Score:2)
Doesn't the old-school Public Domain seem more along the lines of the bazaar than ANYTHING either camp has to offer?
ESR should respond (Score:2, Insightful)
And Sun doesn't get it completely. I applaud them for everything they have done, but if 'realists' look at whats going on, it seems to me that SUN is in bed with MS and will attempt to push Linux into obscurity if not out-right kill it if it can.
Maybe a third model can be added called Markets and it would more accurately describe SUN. They want to be the store you come to and you
Re:ESR should respond (Score:2)
And the Linux community isn't trying to do the same to BSD?
Glass houses...
Re:ESR should respond (Score:2)
Re:ESR should respond (Score:2)
I don't know about the "in bed" part, but there is some truth in what you say.
Traditional companies (like Sun, MS, etc.) dread the thought of a mutating enemy like Linux. They are used to competing with each other, and then this Linux thing comes along (with GPL) with no fixed target, no fixed direction, no clear profit motive, etc.
Only IBM seems to have 'gotten it', and they are embracing Linux (f
I don't believe that ESR (Score:2, Interesting)
Most Java developers have no intention of modifying or fixing the VM and are simply happy with the wonderful set of libraries available to them (Open source or otherwise).
As of 1.4, the quality of the Java VM has been ver good. JDK 1.5 rocks and the platform is alive a
Re:I don't believe that ESR (Score:2)
Honesty (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know the first thing about Schartz, so maybe he's just a slime ball or maybe he just didn't understand the underlying concepts of The Cathedral and the Bazaar, but this sort of behaviour seems to be considered fair ball play these days. And I think it is something that should be left behind on the playground. Heck, it wasn't that common on most the playgrounds of my childhood, outside of certain particular types of debates (where it was understood that different rules of conduct held sway).
Am I right? Is there more of this in the public sphere these days? Or is it just the same-old, same-old?
This exactly matches democracy vs free markets (Score:5, Insightful)
Free markets: nobody has a right to vote how you may or may not act with your own stuff - but if they don't like it, they can get their own stuff and do as they please instead, or go to someone else they prefer. Result: egregious misbehaviour causes a "fork" where customers move away. Also result: not only is the majority happy, but also all profitable minority niches of the market are served.
Not surprising ESR thinks this way considering he's a libertarian and possibly an anarchist
Re:This exactly matches democracy vs free markets (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This exactly matches democracy vs free markets (Score:3, Insightful)
- A monopoly in a truly free market is only contingent on it remaining the most popular solution with customers. So while it can charge higher prices, it can't charge more than the cost of seeking a better-but-costly or worse-but-tolerable alternative. And a monopoly in a free market is a huge plum waiting to be picked by the first person who can break the monopoly and commoditize the product.
- Government is not inevitable. Workable pure free-market or volunteer alternatives have be
The "right to fork" argument (Score:2)
At least with Sun, you stand a chance in getting in on the process, and getting it into the most widely available distribution.
Not so if Linus doesn't like it.
Re:The "right to fork" argument (Score:3, Informative)
With Linux, you have to convince the Linux coders.. thats Linus, and Alan Cox, and dozens of others. Linus has changed his mind on "NO!" answers before - several times, very publicly, after being convinced.
With Sun, you have to convince the Sun committee. The Sun committee has also changed its mind on "NO!" answers before - although they've been 'smaller' issues generally (imho).
Its pretty much equal on that point.
The difference is that with Linux, you can take your ide
This exactly matches democracy vs free markets (Score:4, Funny)
FEUDALISM
You have two cows. Your lord  takes  some of the milk.
PURE SOCIALISM
You have two cows. The government  takes them and puts them in a barn with everyone  else’s cows. You have to take care of all the  cows. The government gives you a glass of milk.
BUREAUCRATIC SOCIALISM  
Your cows are cared for by ex-chicken farmers. You have to take care of the chickens the government  took from the chicken farmers. The government gives you as much milk and eggs the regulations say you should  need.
FASCISM
You have two cows. The government  takes both, hires you to take care of them, and sells  you the milk.
PURE COMMUNISM
You share two cows with your neighbors. You and your neighbors bicker about who has the most “ability” and who has the most “need”.  Meanwhile, no one works, no one gets any milk, and the cows drop dead of starvation.
RUSSIAN COMMUNISM
You have two cows. You have to take care of them, but the government takes all the milk. You steal back as much milk as you can and sell it on the black market.
PERESTROIKA
You have two cows. You  have to take care of them, but the Mafia takes all the milk. You steal back as much milk as you can and sell  it on the “free” market.
CAMBODIAN COMMUNISM
You have two cows. The government takes both and shoots you.
DICTATORSHIP 
You have two cows. The  government takes both and drafts you.
PURE DEMOCRACY
You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.
REPRESENTATIVE  DEMOCRACY
You have two cows.Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.     
BUREAUCRACY
You  have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then  it pays you not  to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms
accounting for the missing cows.
CAPITALISM
You don’t have any cows. The bank will not lend you money to buy cows, because you don’t have any cows to put up as collateral.
PURE ANARCHY
You have two cows. Either you sell the milk at a fair price or your neighbors try to take the cows and kill you.
ANARCHO-CAPITALISM 
You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.
SURREALISM 
You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.     
OLYMPICS-ISM
You have two cows, one American, one Chinese. With the help of trilling violins  and state of the art montage photography,  John Tesh narrates the moving tale of how the American cow overcame  the agony of growing up in a suburb with (gasp) divorced parents, then  mentions in passing  that the Chinese cow was beaten every day by a tyrannical farmer and watched its parents butchered before its eyes. The American cow  wins the competition, severely spraining an udder in a gritty performance, and gets a multi-million dollar contract to endorse Wheaties. The chinese cow is led out of the arena and shot by Chinese government officials, though no one ever hears about  it. McDonald’s buys the meat and serves it hot and fast at its Beijing restaurant.
Sun is relying on the SURREALISM model.
A better link... (Score:3, Informative)
Sun plans patent protection for OpenSolaris (Score:4, Informative)
Sun announce major news - Sun plans patent protection for open-source Solaris and then throw in a dig at ESR for good measure. Ignore the main story - a high-quality Open Source operating system about to enter the market, with an already-gained leading market share - this must mean that - all of a sudden - the majority of servers run an Open Source OS.
Another pretty damn impressive contribution from Sun (and will presumably promote them from #2 contributor of Open Source software to the #1 global contributor of Open Source)
So what does slashdot concentrate on? "Ooh, they slagged off ESR - that's our job". It's a bit like schoolkids, who have the attitude of "Don't call my sister a slut ... I can say it, but if you say it you've got a fight on your hands".
The core of the source article [com.com], which is not mentioned in the headline, is that
and The "bazaar" stuff was just a dig at ESR (and don't we all enjoy that?), pointing out that while Linus controls what ends up on kernel.org, the JCP, not Sun, control what ends up in Java. The JCP are elected by Java developers.In practice, if Linux used this model, I'm sure that nothing would change as most people seem happy with Linus controlling things. But there are developers who get frustrated when their stuff doesn't get into the main tree, which means that they have to keep maintaining their diff's for years on end, just because Linus doesn't like the patch.
On the other end of the scale, there are some really poor drivers still in Linux which really do not deserve to be there, but the original author doesn't have to maintain diff's to keep it in the tree.
That is all a really trivial admin issue, especially when compared to the main one that, to quote the headline, "Sun plans patent protection for open-source Solaris".
That's BIG NEWS. The "bazaar" quibble is just Schwartz getting a dig in for the fun of it.
Re:ESR has no credibility (Score:2, Informative)
Re:ESR has no credibility (Score:2)
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:3, Funny)
I don't like semantical debates at all. (see my latest journal entry?)
Hacker vs. cracker is silly. Because that's a case of someone trying to replace common usage of a word with a less-common (but still valid) usage.
This is not silly. This is Sun trying to subvert the term 'open source
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:2)
Why? Because the pro-GPL and anti-GPL open-source groups disagree on that very point.
Many anti-GPL people say that anything that FORCES a specific license is not free.
Many pro-GPL people say that anything OTHER than GPL is not free.
If the readers of Slashdot can't agree on that point, then why are you surprised that some business doesn't agree with YOUR definition?
Personally, I think that the JCP is much more fr
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:2)
there are real issues at stake (Score:5, Interesting)
Sun is trying to market their products by taking advantage of the good will and trust that open source licenses have and misrepresenting their proprietary products as being associated with open source, and you blame "open source people" for it? You should be blaming Sun marketing and management. Their behavior has been reprehensible.
Open source people have better things to do than to worry about every single proprietary product out there. Get Schwartz and Sun to shut up about open source and cathedrals and bazaars and nobody will waste a second thought on Sun anymore. But as long as Sun keeps misleading people, open source advocates will respond because Sun's behavior is threatening the future of the open source movement.
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't give this thing the wings it so richly doesn't deserve.
Unfortunately, that approach doesn't work. If you don't vigorously deny an accusation, people tend to assume it's true. It's just like the way corporations handle rumours about them (e.g. the one about Proctor and Gamble being a Satanist organisation). They deny them any chance they get and that's the only effective way of dealing with something like that.
If ESR doesn't respond, a lot of casual readers will just sort of assume that Schwartz's claims are true.
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:2)
The unfortunate thing is, as much as he can be considered the expert on the Cathedral and Bazzar, he has absolutely NO CLUE how the JCP runs, or he would not have made some of the comments he did (see my numbered list in my post way at the top of this page).
Re:Semantic Pissing Contest (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Java is not Open Source and this is a good thin (Score:2)
Also, the fact that a company known for subverting every standard they can get a hold of also tried to subvert JAVA does not mean much at all. It is however worth noting that MS did not try this yet with Linux. So... if that is the only example you want to look at, then it seems that being open source prevents the problem you are so afraid of.
Re:More debate! (Score:2)