I would agree with Eric with his following statement. In fact, I was trying to say the same thing.
"I don't really have any opinions on Oracle per say, but Cassandra is a Free Software project and I would prefer that we not depend on commercial software, (and that's kind of what we have here, an implicit dependency)." On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Brice Dutheil <brice.duth...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pretty much a non-story, it seems like. > > Clickbait imho. Search ‘The Register’ in this wikipedia page > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Potentially_unreliable_sources#News_media> > > @Ben Manes > > Agreed, OpenJDK and Oracle JDK are now pretty close, but there is still > some differences in the VM code and third party dependencies like security > libraries. Maybe that’s fine for some productions, but maybe not for > everyone. > > Also another thing, while OpenJDK source is available to all, I don’t > think all OpenJDK builds have been certified with the TCK. For example the > Zulu OpenJDK is, as Azul have access to the TCK and certifies > <https://www.azul.com/products/zulu/> the builds. Another example OpenJDK > build installed on RHEL is certified > <https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013>. Canonical probably is > running TCK comliance tests as well on thei OpenJDK 8 since they are listed > on the signatories > <http://openjdk.java.net/groups/conformance/JckAccess/jck-access.html> > but not sure as I couldn’t find evidence on this; on this signatories list > again there’s an individual – Emmanuel Bourg – who is related to Debian > <https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2015/01/msg00015.html> (linkedin > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/ebourg>), but not sure again the TCK is > passed for each build. > > Bad OpenJDK intermediary builds, i.e without TCK compliance tests, is a > reality > <https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/commit/00a9c5c080f2a5fd1510bc0716db7afe06cbd017> > . > > While the situation has enhanced over the past months I’ll still double > check before using any OpenJDK builds. > > > -- Brice > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Voytek Jarnot <voytek.jar...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Reading that article the only conclusion I can reach (unless I'm >> misreading) is that all the stuff that was never free is still not free - >> the change is that Oracle may actually be interested in the fact that some >> are using non-free products for free. >> >> Pretty much a non-story, it seems like. >> >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Kant Kodali <k...@peernova.com> wrote: >> >>> Looking at this http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/16/oracle_targets_ >>> java_users_non_compliance/?mt=1481919461669 I don't know why Cassandra >>> recommends Oracle JVM? >>> >>> JVM is a great piece of software but I would like to stay away from >>> Oracle as much as possible. Oracle is just horrible the way they are >>> dealing with Java in General. >>> >>> >>> >> >
