A suggestion: Why not set Sun's JDK as the default one?

Derek Broughton news at pointerstop.ca
Tue Oct 21 02:02:32 UTC 2008

Glenn Holmer wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 14:28 -0300, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Glenn Holmer wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 13:03 -0300, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> >> yueyu lin wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> Now even JDK's
>> >> > source codes are open-sourced, I really can't find any clues that
>> >> > the Sun's JDK can't be the default.
>> >> 
>> >> It can, but because of licensing it couldn't when Hardy was released.
>> > 
>> > I agree with the OP that Sun's Java should be the default (with the
>> > option for OpenJDK if you're squeamish).  In fact, I think it should be
>> > installed out-of-box.
>> Absolutely not.  A default JRE, fine, but Ubuntu doesn't install
>> compilers, so why would it install a JDK?
> OK, fine... JRE.  My point is that Java should be installed out-of-box.
>> > But Sun's Open Source version of Java (OpenJDK) was available by the
>> > time 8.04 was released;
>> But was it available a year ago?  I don't think so, and that's the date
>> that matters.
> Huh?  It was available *as part of* 8.04; that's what Rich Green was
> bragging about.

Yes, I had it - but it was part of universe.  Nothing in universe is going
to get installed as a default.  Universe is not Canonical-supported. If the
licensing is OSS-compatible now, it could get into main - if that decision
was made early enough to be included in the final release. 

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list