JVM sources  
Author Message
Xavier





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 17:11:00 Top

java-programmer, JVM sources Hi,

Where can I find C sources for JVM 1.4 for Windows ?

Thanks

Xavier


 
John McGrath





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 17:54:00 Top

java-programmer >> JVM sources On 5/25/2005 at 5:11:07 AM, Xavier wrote:

> Where can I find C sources for JVM 1.4 for Windows ?

http://www.sun.com/software/communitysource/j2se/java2/download.xml

--
Regards,

John McGrath
 
Chris Uppal





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 18:15:00 Top

java-programmer >> JVM sources John McGrath wrote:

> > Where can I find C sources for JVM 1.4 for Windows ?
>
> http://www.sun.com/software/communitysource/j2se/java2/download.xml

But read the license /very/ carefully. IIRC (which I may not, and in any case
IANAL), it pretty much prevents you ever working on any JVM implementation
again (including free ones).

The 1.5 source is available under a different license which is not so damaging.
I don't know if that is available as an option for the earlier releases.

-- chris


 
 
Thomas Weidenfeller





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 18:43:00 Top

java-programmer >> JVM sources Chris Uppal wrote:
> The 1.5 source is available under a different license which is not so damaging.
> I don't know if that is available as an option for the earlier releases.

Sun also has a new contribution process with an own contributor
agreement for Java 1.6. A very nice idea - until you find such
"wounderful" wording in the contributor agreement:

> 3. You hereby grant to Sun, and to any party who receives Your Contribution, a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, no-charge, royalty-free, patent license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer Your Contribution, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by You that are infringed by Your Contribution alone or by combination of Your Contribution with the work to which such Contributions were submitted. No patent license is granted: (a) for any code that a licensee has deleted from Your Contribution; or (b) for infringements caused by either: (i) third party modifications of Your Contribution, or (ii) the combination of Your Contribution with other software or other devices if such combination causes the infringement.

I have not the remotest idea what they are talking about. 70+ words in
one sentence. It not only took a lawyer to write it, it takes one or two
to understand it :-( And Sun thinks this will motivate people to contribute?

/Thomas

--
The comp.lang.java.gui FAQ:
ftp://ftp.cs.uu.nl/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS/computer-lang/java/gui/faq
 
 
Chris Uppal





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 19:21:00 Top

java-programmer >> JVM sources Thomas Weidenfeller wrote:

> Sun also has a new contribution process with an own contributor
> agreement for Java 1.6. A very nice idea - until you find such
> "wounderful" wording in the contributor agreement:
>
> > 3. You hereby grant to Sun, and to any party who receives Your
> > Contribution, a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, no-charge,
> > royalty-free, patent license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to
> > sell, import and otherwise transfer Your Contribution, where such
> > license applies only to those patent claims licensable by You that are
> > infringed by Your Contribution alone or by combination of Your
> > Contribution with the work to which such Contributions were submitted.
> > No patent license is granted: (a) for any code that a licensee has
> > deleted from Your Contribution; or (b) for infringements caused by
> > either: (i) third party modifications of Your Contribution, or (ii) the
> > combination of Your Contribution with other software or other devices
> > if such combination causes the infringement.
>
> I have not the remotest idea what they are talking about.

I /think/ it may mean that if you submit code to Sun that infringes someone
else's patent, then Sun can still distribute and use the code as widely as they
want, but /you/ have to pay all the patent license fees.

I'm not a lawyer, and I could easily be wrong, but that's what it looks like to
me. Enticing...

-- chris


 
 
Thomas Weidenfeller





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 21:18:00 Top

java-programmer >> JVM sources Chris Uppal wrote:
> I'm not a lawyer, and I could easily be wrong, but that's what it looks like to
> me. Enticing...

I think we have to be glad that Sun doesn't ask for our first-born, or
do they? Seriously, how can Sun expect people to sign this? The other
paragraphs in that document are similar: "moral rights", "common law",
"without application of choice of law rules", "duty whatsoever to render
an accounting to the other party" :-(

It is the same story as with the JCP agreement. That one also requires a
bunch of lawyers for deciphering. Either Sun doesn't know what they are
doing, or they still just pay lip-service that they want to have more
outside contributions. Since Sun says that even e-mails to the 1.6 jdk
project and "postings" are covered by the agreement, I don't think it is
a good idea to communicate with this people at all without a lawyer :-(

/Thomas

--
The comp.lang.java.gui FAQ:
ftp://ftp.cs.uu.nl/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS/computer-lang/java/gui/faq
 
 
John C. Bollinger





PostPosted: 2005-5-25 23:01:00 Top

java-programmer >> JVM sources Thomas Weidenfeller wrote:

> Chris Uppal wrote:
>
>> The 1.5 source is available under a different license which is not so
>> damaging.
>> I don't know if that is available as an option for the earlier releases.
>
>
> Sun also has a new contribution process with an own contributor
> agreement for Java 1.6. A very nice idea - until you find such
> "wounderful" wording in the contributor agreement:
>
>> 3. You hereby grant to Sun, and to any party who receives Your
>> Contribution, a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, no-charge,
>> royalty-free, patent license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to
>> sell, import and otherwise transfer Your Contribution, where such
>> license applies only to those patent claims licensable by You that are
>> infringed by Your Contribution alone or by combination of Your
>> Contribution with the work to which such Contributions were submitted.
>> No patent license is granted: (a) for any code that a licensee has
>> deleted from Your Contribution; or (b) for infringements caused by
>> either: (i) third party modifications of Your Contribution, or (ii)
>> the combination of Your Contribution with other software or other
>> devices if such combination causes the infringement.
>
>
> I have not the remotest idea what they are talking about. 70+ words in
> one sentence. It not only took a lawyer to write it, it takes one or two
> to understand it :-( And Sun thinks this will motivate people to
> contribute?

IANAL, but ...

The main point seems to be that Sun is licensed to do more or less
anything it wants to with the contribution, relative to any and all
*patents* on the contents that you are able to license to them.
Furthermore, as a special case, anyone who receives the contribution
under the agreement terms (initially only Sun) may pass it on to others
such that the same terms apply to them.

Secondarily, the agreement appears rather protective of the contributor,
especially in that it explicitly does not obligate the contributor to
provide a patent license where the contribution itself is non-infringing
but subsequent modification or combination with other work produces an
infringement.

--
John Bollinger
email***@***.com