Repository navigation
Use BinaryBuilder to install java?? #136
Description
Activity
What are the licensing implications of this?
OpenJDK is GPLv2 with linking exception (classpath exception)
This package is MIT licensed, so it's fine to depend on GPLv2 packages. Most people now use OpenJDK (via AdoptOpenJDK) i imagine.
Yes, but by distributing GPLv2, we will then entering others into a GPLv2 license, and may also draw questions about the licensing of this package, so I think this has be done carefully.
In particular, JavaCall should not depend on a OpenJDK JLL. It should be able to use it is it happens to be installed though.
https://github.com/JuliaMath/FFTW.jl provides some precedent for this, although is some reluctance to distributing the runtimes of other lanugages.
https://julialang.slack.com/archives/C674ELDNX/p1614712811136600
I suggest this is not really worth doing. People who use JavaCall surely don't want their Java coming from BB.
One possibility is to use CondaPkg.jl to install openjdk:
https://anaconda.org/conda-forge/openjdkWe could set this up as a package extension to an OpenJDK.jl wrapper.
Should we try to use BinaryBuilder to install a private version of Java within the Julia depot?
condainstalls it's own Java. But is it a good idea?The main advantage is that the user does not need to install java themselves. This is particularly valuable for users of Julia libraries with Java dependencies. So if you want to use Taro.jl, you don't need to worry about getting a JVM on your machine if you don't already have one.