

Hudson (OSS CI Server) to rename itself to escape Oracle's control - brown9-2
http://www.hudson-labs.org/content/hudsons-future

======
pohl
Oracle is dropping the ball here. They appear to only see value in the
trademark, but not in the people. I predict the brand value to shift over to
Jenkins fairly quickly.

Jenkins is a great name, by the way.

~~~
brown9-2
It seems to me like they realize that Hudson would be a good asset for them in
some way and since the code was so long ago open-sourced, they feel like their
only move left to play is this (dubious) trademark of the name.

The other half is this is that it seems like they want to avoid any sort of
bad PR over a pretty visible OSS project which was under their (inherited)
hosting umbrella (java.net) moving to other hosting platforms because Oracle's
platform is so unreliable or just flat-out not popular.

------
js2
_the choice for a new name is Jenkins, which we think evokes the same sort of
English butler feel as Hudson_

Sadly, for me all it evokes is Leeroy Jenkins. Surely there are better English
butler names such as Wadsworth, or you know, just Butler. :)

~~~
biot
As it's a continuous _integration_ server, how about Leibniz?

~~~
limmeau
Leibniz.org is already taken by the Bahlsen cookie company for their famous
(in Germany) brand of dry rectangular butter cookies.

------
cemerick
Sounds like the respective sides reached agreement on all of the really
substantive issues, but flopped on the most trivial yet most symbolic one.
Oracle could gain a fair bit of goodwill (or perhaps reclaim some of what
they've lost due to this charade) by just granting the trademark to the core
devs (for free use by anyone, presumably). They could still sell Oracle Hudson
Enterprise Continuous Integration Server or whatever.

Beyond that, I'd think their partners (e.g. Sonatype, which has its own
commercial hudson-based product) would prefer to not be faced with a choice
between Oracle Hudson and OSS Jenkins (where the latter would surely have the
majority of heat and light).

~~~
msy
If you think Oracle gives the slightest shit about good will you have not been
paying attention.

~~~
eneveu
I think it will damage their business in the long term, as today's developers
gradually move to business positions.

Before Oracle acquired Sun, I was neutral toward them, and didn't really care.
I thought they were a big enterprise vendor, with a supposedly very good (but
pricey) database. If I were given the money to use their DB, I would use it.

Now, I really hate what they represent. 10 years from now, as a CTO, I will
try my best to consider other options, even if I have the "money" for an
Oracle DB. I already love Postgres, but with Oracle's recent behavior, I will
push even more toward good open source projects and away from bloated
enterprise solutions.

Plus, Postgres / RethinkDB / other OSS databases will be better in 10 years ;)

------
SoftwareMaven
I am currently evaluating alternatives for a new architecture at my company.
Clojure on the JVM is on my list, but I'm really nervous about Oracle. I
realize the community can fork the VM (or just move down the Harmony road),
but I don't want to get caught in the middle of the battle.

Every time Oracle does something like this, it pushes further away from
selecting it. Guess I need to brush up on my Erlang.

~~~
cemerick
I've never quite followed why unrelated actions are thought to be somehow
indicative of how Oracle is or is going to manage the JVM. Assuming you were
going to be using their implementation anyway, extracurriculars like this
Hudson drama seem entirely unrelated -- especially given the continued
emphasis on OpenJDK (which has a GPLv2 + classpath license).

JVM languages like Clojure, Scala, JRuby, etc. would seem to be an entirely
safe choice AFAICT. I'd be interested in hearing concrete contrary theories.

~~~
weavejester
If the Hudson debacle was an isolated case, I'd agree with you. But Oracle
have been alienating a lot of people in the open source community, and this
incident isn't going to reassure anyone of Oracle's intentions.

And whilst the OpenJDK is open source, Oracle have made it pretty clear that
they are not above using trademarks and patents to enforce their control over
the JVM.

~~~
cemerick
I guess my response would be, "So?". The question is whether the JVM is a
reasonable, safe, and reliable platform to build upon. While Oracle's actions
vis à vis various projects haven't been what many would have preferred, AFAIK
they've stated their intentions for OpenJDK pretty clearly -- and the recent
folding of IBM and Apple into that project is no small endorsement. As for
control of their VM, yeah, I'd expect that (the Google issues are entirely
separate from the JCP drama, etc, which is SOP since long before Oracle came
around).

FWIW, I say most of this to reassure myself more than anything else, given my
investment in the JVM. If there are real substantive reasons to be concerned –
essentially, indications that Oracle has likely just lied about their plans
for the JVM, or something more than the vague warnings I usually see – I want
to be the first to know.

~~~
regularfry
The JVM is safe for precisely as long as it's in Oracle's interests for the
current situation to pertain. Oracle aren't capricious per se, but they are
the very definition of capitalism, red in tooth and claw, in a way that Sun
famously weren't. If they see a way to monetise the platform that _as a
byproduct_ happens to close it down as an open venue, I don't think that would
stop them for a second.

------
Pewpewarrows
For those just curious what they'll be renaming to (as I was), it's Jenkins.

------
michaelneale
Kohsuke's post: <http://kohsuke.org/bye-bye-hudson-hello-jenkins/>

------
nowarninglabel
Just thought I'd throw this out there that a really nice alternative is
luntbuild <http://luntbuild.javaforge.com/> and if you are an open-source
project you can use quickbuild for free (or pay for it if you are commercial):
<http://www.pmease.com/>

------
JeffJenkins
I can't say I really care for the name! But I guess this is better then if
they'd chosen "Jeffrey" as their Butler name

------
iandanforth
I am impressed and reminded of this quote:

"He showed those men of will what will really was."

Overly dramatic? Perhaps, but it's not easy to give up a name to retain the
freedom for a project.

------
dman
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

------
BonoboBoner
Rest in piece Hudson, long live Jenkins.

------
thomasfl
Oracle, we love you.

------
j2d2j2d2
The Internet already has a Jenkins...

Leeeerrroooyyyy Jennnnkiiinnnsssss

