Legitimate question: what is keeping stock OpenJDK from being considered "production-ready" as it is?
They may not actually install those updates, but they want to hear someone say that they will exist.
Are the articles that Red Had publishes ever proof read?
:)
The discussion goes something like this:
Customer: "How much does this cost?"
Oracle sales: "How much money do you have?"
Now this isn't quite as bad as it sounds (charge based on the value that the new system will bring) but the conversation was definitely a bit uncomfortable..... Oracle was not selected as the vendor.
Edit:
SAP weren't selected either for different reasons:
SAP: "You are a manufacturing company and will use SAP like this"
Customer: "We see why you might think that but we don't manufacture things"
SAP: "You are a manufacturing company and will use SAP like this"
Customer: Next...
Obviously, there was more to both conversations - but these are reasonable summaries based upon my dubious memories.
Right. What distinguishes Amazon's offering is that it has that kind of backing at zero cost.
With Oracle, you can have zero cost, or “production-ready” backing, but not both together.
[1]: https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/oracle-jdk-rele...
Production Ready is a different thing than commercially supported. Linux is "production ready" even if you get a distribution which is not commercially supported with a contract and agreements on fixing it at 3 AM when it blows up.
Tl;Dr: with Oracle changing the release versioning of Java, LTS releases are now essentially a paid product. If you run a large business with a lot of Java that is now a significant new burden to deal with.