|
Shniep
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
du -hast posted:Shniep what
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
Sniep posted:what oh hey bro..didn't mean to throw ur name out. ... please don't hack me
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Sun was encrypting the source drops I got from them in 1997, so probably not no. is BSD talking about the specifications and not the implementation?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
celeron 300a posted:is BSD talking about the specifications and not the implementation? that would be a pretty unusual definition of "open source", even by the standards of yospos rhetoric
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
he incorrectly read the wiki close thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
bsd doesnt know what hes talking about 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:what parts? they didn't start to open-source the runtime until 2006. Suspicious Dish posted:OK, now you're just flat out lying. celeron 300a posted:is BSD talking about the specifications and not the implementation? java has always had source available, since the first day i touched it. the 1996 date came from the first "blackdown java" release: non-Sun coders ported java to linux without Sun's help the license was very restrictive with respect to redistribution, but afaik java was never closed source 2006 was when they started releasing code under licenses more acceptable to cheeto-bearded fanatics. the source had always been freely available before that, just not FREE AS IN FREEDOM GNU FOREVER free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
theadder posted:he incorrectly read the wiki close thread only when linux is on the desktop
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:java has always had source available, since the first day i touched it. the 1996 date came from the first "blackdown java" release: non-Sun coders ported java to linux without Sun's help are we going to start splitting hairs and differentiating between the base java api and the virtual machine or are we going to argue about what the definition of open source is either way this is a good way to start the weekend
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
celeron 300a posted:only when linux is on the desktop it's on my desktop,op please do the needful
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
windows was always open source. i remember decompiling ntoskrnl.exe in 2002. been there the whole time
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
you could license some of the source for Java for $0 (though with some pretty onerous clauses), but it was hardly open source. it required you to enter into a contract with Sun, among other things. at Netscape we couldn't share JVM patches with other licensees even (including those which made some drops of the code actually run on Solaris). I don't think Karl and co would ever have described Blackdown as open source, and IIRC Sun never released source to any of the JITs prior to the grand relicensing in 06.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
gnome 2 and to a lesser extent kde 3 were just about acceptable. every linux de since has been poorly conceived and even more poorly implemented cargo-culting crap. hth
shitface fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Jan 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
celeron 300a posted:are we going to start splitting hairs and differentiating between the base java api and the virtual machine the whole kit and kaboodle was freely available, with source only the mobile stuff was closed. and nobody ever used that anyway celeron 300a posted:or are we going to argue about what the definition of open source is in the early 2000s, a lobbying group tried to convince the industry that "open source" meant something more than just having open access to the source. i never much bought into that
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:you could license some of the source for Java for $0 (though with some pretty onerous clauses), but it was hardly open source. it required you to enter into a contract with Sun, among other things. at Netscape we couldn't share JVM patches with other licensees even (including those which made some drops of the code actually run on Solaris). the "contract with sun" was a clickthrough agreement the inability to share jvm patches is what drove the cheeto-beard crowd nuts Subjunctive posted:I don't think Karl and co would ever have described Blackdown as open source, and IIRC Sun never released source to any of the JITs prior to the grand relicensing in 06. the whole thing was open source or did you imagine that blackdown 1.2.0+ was somehow ported w/out access to the jit
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:in the early 2000s, a lobbying group tried to convince the industry that "open source" meant something more than just having open access to the source. i never much bought into that the term "open source" in its OSI sense was coined in a meeting of free software nerds following the announcement of the Netscape source release, I think before we announced the license but after we'd ruled out the GPL. probably March 1998 at the latest. Linus and ESR and Tiemann and such picked it up pretty quickly, and I think we referenced it when we pushed the first source drop on March 31st of that year. the only other meaning the phrase has really ever had refers to unclassified intelligence sources, AFAIK
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:or did you imagine that blackdown 1.2.0+ was somehow ported w/out access to the jit my recollection was that Blackdown had private access to J2SE that was more complete than the public source, including hotspot. maybe that's not right; I recall there being a bunch of 3rd-party JITs for Blackdown that played hell with the Java plugin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:the term "open source" in its OSI sense was coined in a meeting of free software nerds following the announcement of the Netscape source release, I think before we announced the license but after we'd ruled out the GPL. probably March 1998 at the latest. Linus and ESR and Tiemann and such picked it up pretty quickly, and I think we referenced it when we pushed the first source drop on March 31st of that year. as with "free software" two words with plain meaning got a lot of extra crap attached
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:my recollection was that Blackdown had private access to J2SE that was more complete than the public source, including hotspot. maybe that's not right; I recall there being a bunch of 3rd-party JITs for Blackdown that played hell with the Java plugin. i can remember compiling a working java from scratch on freebsd circa 2001, so clearly the public release was pretty darned complete. sun sure wasn't building any binary blobs for freebsd users. i know for sure blackdown got a better license than the public, since they were able to redistribute binaries, when no one else could.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:i can remember compiling a working java from scratch on freebsd circa 2001, so clearly the public release was pretty darned complete. sun sure wasn't building any binary blobs for freebsd users. oh, it worked, but IIRC it was just the interpreter in the public-clickthrough drop. maybe that's not true. Blackdown got the TCK license, which was the really big deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:as with "free software" two words with plain meaning got a lot of extra crap attached "Being able to download the source without going through a publicly-held company's legal department" isn't a lot of extra crap imo
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:12
|
|
|
to me it means "dont have to pay for it" i refuse to acknowledge RMS' redefinition of basic words to suit his political agendas, but, source code doesnt have to be available to everyone if the programs work well and are maintained by their providers. i dont want to have to fix their bugs to use their poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:"Being able to download the source without going through a publicly-held company's legal department" isn't a lot of extra crap imo oh yeah that click through license was a real killer got rsi clicking twice, a checkbox AND a submit button
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
hey remember when gnome was cool and good
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Just to be clear, you're taking about the source dump which was obfuscated, slow, and had maybe a fourth of the functionality of the real JVM, which stopped existing after Sun sued MS for their MSJVM?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:hey remember when gnome was cool and good not seeing it
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:hey remember when gnome was cool and good I'm the randomly bold and fuzzy font characters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:oh yeah that click through license was a real killer the issue isn't whether or not it stumped you, though I can understand that you want to celebrate your ability to navigate a challenging artifact like that. the issue is that the terms were pretty onerous if you ever actually wanted to work on a virtual machine of some kind, which might be expected if you're interested in the source for a virtual machine. (it also wasn't really clear what commercial use meant, even in the absence of distribution.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
is this what u think is good
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
akadajet posted:I'm the randomly bold and fuzzy font characters. umm no. i am
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
i should like to be the kerning
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
im the photorealistic padlock next to the cartoon speaker
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
carry on then posted:im the photorealistic padlock next to the cartoon speaker anybody can contribute 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
akadajet posted:I'm the randomly bold and fuzzy font characters. linux font rendering works from the "mechanical pencil on wet paper" model.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
it looks like cde, but worse. which is frankly incredible
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
it was also much much slower and had a more awkward programming model, both of which are signal accomplishments in their own right
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
it looks bad but it also looks better than any linux out there today
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Just to be clear, you're taking about the source dump which was obfuscated, slow, and had maybe a fourth of the functionality of the real JVM, which stopped existing after Sun sued MS for their MSJVM? Subjunctive posted:oh, it worked, but IIRC it was just the interpreter in the public-clickthrough drop. maybe that's not true. i do not remember the versions built from source being in any way incomplete. looking at docs about java on freebsd back in '01, they talk about the challenges of developing a valid patchset to build hotspot. which implies the public release contained hotspot. i'm not sure how or why sun would distribute a known-broken java it is also possible the public source dumps lagged the actual releases. java 1.2 is when it stopped being slow and terrible, maybe the source release was trapped on 1.1 for some time and i just never would have had reason to notice p.s. the microsoft/sun lawsuit was in 1997.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 07:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
Last Chance posted:it looks bad but it also looks better than any linux out there today also it has a start menu and all the window buttons where you expect them gnome 1: unironically more usable than gnome 3 carry on then posted:im the photorealistic padlock next to the cartoon speaker the worst part is that one of them has a drop shadow also i think both these icons shipped with gnome by default
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2015 07:19
|
|