[NETBEANS] [CENSORSHIP] [Fwd: Returned post for nbusers@netbeans.org]

From: Ilias Lazaridis (ilias_at_lazaridis.com)
Date: 12/10/04 

Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 22:45:01 +0200

Find attached a message which was *censored* within a public forum of
the NetBeans Project.

Content Summary of Censored Message:
"The NetBeans Open Source Lie" [NetBeans IDE is _not_ Open Source].

My message was an reply to this message:
JAXP & other licenses
http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=872191&listName=nbusers

The full initial thread:
[EVALUATION] - E11 - Sun Microsystems Board of Directors
http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=871387&listName=nbusers

-

nntp access:
news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.java.ide.netbeans.user

-

The foundation for the censorship was _personally_ given by the Sun
Microsystems Employee and NetBeans Board Member Tim Boudreau.

He _personally_ set the public nbuser forum on 'moderation', without any
authority on doing so:

NbUsers is now on full moderation
http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=872266&listName=nbusers

Most possibly, he censors my messages now personally.

I cannot evaluate this - the process is intransparent.

-

Possibly some members of the community have complained about the
moderation/censorship.

This complaints are most possibly censored too.

I cannot evaluate this - the process is intransparent.

-

Covering censorship with the tenor of moderation is the action of an
coward.

Once more Sun Microsystems employees show their lack of courage and
integrity.

This incident is a shame for the whole Java community.

-
-
-

Silence is Accepting.

Act Against Censorship on Java Forums!

. 

-- 
http://lazaridis.com

attached mail follows:

Date: 9 Dec 2004 21:28:14 -0000
To: gcjinu-nbusers@gmane.org

Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
nbusers@netbeans.org mailing list.

I'm sorry, your message (enclosed) was not accepted by the moderator.
If the moderator has made any comments, they are shown below.

attached mail follows:

To: nbusers@netbeans.org
Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2004 22:18:16 +0200

Tim Boudreau wrote:
[moved into context]

> Kirill K. wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 15:04 +0200, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>
>>> ok, I'll try to elaborate.
>>>
>>>> JRE, including rt.jar, is obviously not open source, and
>>>> still NB relies on it hardly. Is it also a reason not to call NB open
>>>> source? I guess your answer is negative.
[...] - {The Open-Source Language-Runtime Question}.

>>>> But how do the above mentioned
>>>> libraries differ from rt.jar except in that they are bundled with IDE
>>>> itself?
>>>
>>> As you've said, they are "bundled with IDE itself".
>>>
>>> They are _integral_ part of the Product (and its main functionality)
>>> [NetBeans IDE] which is declared as Open Source.
>>>
>>> But you cannot alter e.g. the "XML" or the "J2EE Editor" behaviour in
>>> the Open Source way.
>>
>> Well, there definitely is something in what you're saying. And this is
>> an interesting discussion.
>>
>> Let's start with XML. As far as I know, JAXP is an integral part of J2SE
>> 1.4 and higher, so there shouldn't be any need to include it in NB,
>> since these are the only platforms supported by NB. Regarding the parser
>> implementation... Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think NB
>> only uses Apache Xerces parser?.. (which is distributed under the Apache
>> open-source license) At least, I can see it packaged in
>> netbeans/ide4/modules/autoload/ext/xerces-2.6.2.jar. And the interesting
>> thing is that I can also see it under the
>> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal package inside of rt.jar that comes
>> with JDK 1.5! And (correct me if I'm wrong) it seems to me that J2SE 1.4
>> includes a XML parser implementation, too.
>>
>> Please someone explain the whole thing: why do legal documents state
>> that NB includes BCL'ed XML parser, if in reality it doesn't. Or,
>> alternatively, why does it include both Xerces and that mistorical
>> BCL'ed parser? And why does it include these parsers at all, if the
>> functionality is already present in JDK? The same questions apply to
>> JAXP.
>>
>> -------
>>
>> So. We probably shouldn't complain about JAXP, as it's part of the J2SE
>> platform. We shouldn't complain about the XML parser, if in reality NB
>> only uses Xerces.

> Re the JAXP license, I suspect it's just there because at some point
> (circa JDK 1.3) we were shipping it, and at the time it was covered by
> the BCL; perhaps some module from that period has not been updated or
> something such - anyway, there are no nefarious plots here :-)

possibly "no nefarious plots" [here, XML], but for sure some sloppiness.

> I'll look into it and find out why that's there and let the list know.

You should hurry, thus the 4.0 final release gets the correction.

>> But what about the J2EE Editor module? I have given this thing a thought
>> and I can't but agree with Ilias: if everything is the way it sounds,
>> J2EE Editor module is a functional part of the IDE. And if it is really
>> distributed under the BCL, I agree that the fact it is included with the
>> open source IDE doesn't look right. As well as the fact that in order to
>> use free open-source IDE, one must sign under terms and conditions of
>> some proprietary thing which can't even be replaced by an open-source
>> alternative.
>> Again, I am asking for explanations/clarifications on this issue.

> Re the J2EE editor stuff, which specific piece/license are you
looking > at?

The context is _very_ clear:

_Every_ J2EE "editor stuff" which is contained in NetBeans IDE and is
licenced under the (non-open-source) BCL - thus making the NetBeans IDE
a _non_-open-source product.

I'm intrested in those clarifications, too.

> Note that we have been known to make binaries for NetBeans available
> *before* something's been open sourced - there's a major legal process
> a Sun developer has to go through to open source something, to satisfy
> the lawyers that Sun isn't violating anybody's copyright and giving
> away something it does not actually own - proving that they indeed
> wrote all the code that's being open sourced, etc. The easiest
> workaround is, of course, to develop all the code in NetBeans CVS in
> the first place, but it can't always be done that way.

I doubt the validity of the statements [or more precise:
justifications], but I'll not go into this, to simplify things.

=> {Sun has a slow closed-to-open-source-transformation processes}
=> {Sun can't always develope in an Open Source CVS}

>
> Sun of course can also make binary-only stuff available for NetBeans,
> either for free or for sale - as can any company that wants to. In
> the long run, a model we're considering is to sell "module kits" for
> specific technologies - after all, all of the IDEs Sun ships are
> NetBeans anyway - having one technology and three names for it doesn't
> make a huge amount of sense.

=> {Sun can make binary-only stuff available (free or for sale)}
=> {Sun considers to sell "module kits" for specific technologies}

-

You have just given some justifications and some off-context comments.

Basically you confirm, that the Product "NetBeans IDE 4.0" (which
includes the J2EE Editor "Stuff") is not Open Source.

Thus my title "The NetBeans Open Source Lie" is perfectly valid.

Isn't it?

> -Tim

[note to readers:
NbUsers is now apparently on "silent censorship mode":

NbUsers is now on full moderation
http://www.netbeans.org/servlets/ReadMsg?msgId=872266&listName=nbusers

I don't think that this is true, as I don't think that a Sun
Microsystems employee would violate the most essential rules of the
open-source netbeans system in a manner which comes close to an insult.
]

--------------090604050600050204090306--

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Beginner - Netbeans code behind class
    ... I installed the Sun Studio Creator and it seems the closest match to VS.NET ... IDE as I wanted it. ... > None of the Sun IDE's are based on NetBeans 5.0. ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: Change from VB
    ... >Java that makes it easy to create forms, ... Netbeans is free and Open Source. ... I found JBuilder felt the closest to the VB IDE. ... Sun One Studio 4 Community Edition, which is derived from Netbeans, is ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • [NETBEANS] [EVALUATION] - E12 - The NetBeans Open Source Lie
    ... I will use c.l.j.sotwaretools for further posts regarding NetBeans. ... Open Source Lie" has started. ... Responsible Sun Microsystems Executives: ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • [NETBEANS] [EVALUATION] - E12 - The NetBeans Open Source Lie
    ... I will use c.l.j.sotwaretools for further posts regarding NetBeans. ... Open Source Lie" has started. ... Responsible Sun Microsystems Executives: ...
    (comp.lang.java.softwaretools)
  • Re: [NETBEANS] [CENSORSHIP] [Fwd: Returned post for nbusers@netbeans.org]
    ... >some of its lawyers. ... logical complaint. ... >> would never have had to go throught he pain of 'evaluating' NetBeans ... So called 'censorship' that resulted from your attempts to ruin the ...
    (comp.lang.java.softwaretools)