7 ms·

Honestly, we need to just fork Java away from Oracle, just like Solaris and ZFS have been done. I find it deliciously ironic that Oracle's products are no long

Honestly, we need to just fork Java away from Oracle, just like Solaris and ZFS have been done. I find it deliciously ironic that Oracle's products are no longer compatible with Solaris and ZFS because they won't follow upstream... because they don't understand they aren't upstream anymore. Java needs the same treatment.

sgift 10y ago
Why exactly would we want to do that? OpenJDK is already the main branch/upstream/however you want to name it, most people just don't use it for various reasons. Maybe this will change now, problem solved.
- matwood 10y ago
  Is the OpenJDK a drop in replacement for the Oracle JDK as long as you are not using the commercial features? I'd like to move away from the Oracle JDK, but I'm not sure what gotchas I'm going to run into.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Not 100%, for example JavaFX. Hence why there is a parallel OpenJavaFX project. Or GUI rendering code, hence why JetBrains has their own fork for those that don't want to use commercial JDKs on GNU/Linux.
    - matwood 10y ago
      It sounds like then, for server uses it is a drop replacement? I've run one of our spring-boot apps on the openjdk and it has worked fine. My fear is that there are some nuances that only become apparent at load or in certain edge cases. It seems like that's not the case, but I'll keep investigating.
      - dlandis 10y ago
        > It sounds like then, for server uses it is a drop replacement? Yes, and in fact OpenJDK is the reference implementation nowadays. You could also check out the IBM JDK if you want to move off of Oracle.
mrfk 10y ago
Do these issues effect clojure which use the jvm and can rely pretty heavily (depending on application/dev preference) on Java interop?
- geodel 10y ago
  Not too sure. But I think it will as those commercial features are low level tools heavily dependent on JVM and JRE.
zxcvb 10y ago
Quality HN post as always - no idea what you're talking about. Oracle isn't the upstream for Java anyway.
geodel 10y ago
OpenJDK has about ~750 contributors with more than half associated/employed or sponsored by Oracle contributing to most significant part of JDK. It is about 1M+ lines of highly optimized C/C++ code and 4M lines of Java code. So it is not like a package or a library that a dozen or contributor manage well. And Considering payment is the core issue here I do not know how highly paid people will be made to work on JDK.
- sangnoir 10y ago
  > And Considering payment is the core issue here I do not know how highly paid people will be made to work on JDK. They will be employed to work on the JDK: there are plenty of companies that are already involved in Java and employ people to work on it outside of Oracle. Hypothetically IBM, Red Hat, Google and the other non-Hotspot VM makers could band together and fork Java successfully - hell, a even a bank or 3 will want in on the action. They will have to name it something else and prepare for the inevitable epic lawsuit, but funding people to work in the JDK will nor be a problem.
  - geodel 10y ago
    I think all 3 you mentioned are spending not insignificant resources in other programing languages. IBM sees future in Swift LOB apps and Go on blockchain related efforts. Also with open sourcing of their own J9 components they would be even less inclined to participate in OpenJDK fork or some such Redhat sees Ceylon on apps side and with all this containerization thing going on, may be quite a bit of Go. Google of course is betting big on Dart on apps side and Go on infra side. For Banks I do not see any issue at all to either pay Oracle or Azul to get commercially supported JDK. Their main unique requirements are either high-perf GC(Azul) or high perf collections which they anyway write for themselves.
    - snuxoll 10y ago
      Red Hat still has a lot of money invested in the JVM ecosystem, see all the JBoss products. Ceylon also targets the JVM, so even if not Java The Language we will see Red Hat continue to support Java The Platform for a long time.
davidgerard 10y ago
OpenJDK is still essentially Oracle-maintained. It's GPL, but you need to give them full rights to your contributions with a CLA: http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/
pjmlp 10y ago
Sure and who will pay the Oracle devs on OpenJDK?

sgift 10y ago

Why exactly would we want to do that? OpenJDK is already the main branch/upstream/however you want to name it, most people just don't use it for various reasons. Maybe this will change now, problem solved.

matwood 10y ago
Is the OpenJDK a drop in replacement for the Oracle JDK as long as you are not using the commercial features? I'd like to move away from the Oracle JDK, but I'm not sure what gotchas I'm going to run into.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Not 100%, for example JavaFX. Hence why there is a parallel OpenJavaFX project. Or GUI rendering code, hence why JetBrains has their own fork for those that don't want to use commercial JDKs on GNU/Linux.
  - matwood 10y ago
    It sounds like then, for server uses it is a drop replacement? I've run one of our spring-boot apps on the openjdk and it has worked fine. My fear is that there are some nuances that only become apparent at load or in certain edge cases. It seems like that's not the case, but I'll keep investigating.
    - dlandis 10y ago
      > It sounds like then, for server uses it is a drop replacement? Yes, and in fact OpenJDK is the reference implementation nowadays. You could also check out the IBM JDK if you want to move off of Oracle.

mrfk 10y ago

Do these issues effect clojure which use the jvm and can rely pretty heavily (depending on application/dev preference) on Java interop?

geodel 10y ago
Not too sure. But I think it will as those commercial features are low level tools heavily dependent on JVM and JRE.

zxcvb 10y ago

Quality HN post as always - no idea what you're talking about. Oracle isn't the upstream for Java anyway.

geodel 10y ago

OpenJDK has about ~750 contributors with more than half associated/employed or sponsored by Oracle contributing to most significant part of JDK. It is about 1M+ lines of highly optimized C/C++ code and 4M lines of Java code. So it is not like a package or a library that a dozen or contributor manage well. And Considering payment is the core issue here I do not know how highly paid people will be made to work on JDK.

sangnoir 10y ago
> And Considering payment is the core issue here I do not know how highly paid people will be made to work on JDK. They will be employed to work on the JDK: there are plenty of companies that are already involved in Java and employ people to work on it outside of Oracle. Hypothetically IBM, Red Hat, Google and the other non-Hotspot VM makers could band together and fork Java successfully - hell, a even a bank or 3 will want in on the action. They will have to name it something else and prepare for the inevitable epic lawsuit, but funding people to work in the JDK will nor be a problem.
- geodel 10y ago
  I think all 3 you mentioned are spending not insignificant resources in other programing languages. IBM sees future in Swift LOB apps and Go on blockchain related efforts. Also with open sourcing of their own J9 components they would be even less inclined to participate in OpenJDK fork or some such Redhat sees Ceylon on apps side and with all this containerization thing going on, may be quite a bit of Go. Google of course is betting big on Dart on apps side and Go on infra side. For Banks I do not see any issue at all to either pay Oracle or Azul to get commercially supported JDK. Their main unique requirements are either high-perf GC(Azul) or high perf collections which they anyway write for themselves.
  - snuxoll 10y ago
    Red Hat still has a lot of money invested in the JVM ecosystem, see all the JBoss products. Ceylon also targets the JVM, so even if not Java The Language we will see Red Hat continue to support Java The Platform for a long time.

davidgerard 10y ago

OpenJDK is still essentially Oracle-maintained. It's GPL, but you need to give them full rights to your contributions with a CLA: http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/

pjmlp 10y ago

Sure and who will pay the Oracle devs on OpenJDK?