We've been friends enough years that you know I'm not "just lashing out because Java SE wasn't open sourced in time for JavaOne". You know that I am a middle-of-the-roader with respect to this issue. I don't really care whether or not Java is open sourced. I have a complete different interpretation of the phrase that the question isn't whether it's how. I don't care whether Java is open sourced. But if it is open sourced, I do care how.
As you well know, there are not things that I can write publicly to answer your challenge here. I do, however, want to respond to your comment:
"Until Java is open source there is no way to work with it except through licensing changes. Sad, but true. You'd prefer me to do nothing and leave things broken, I assume?"
Again, you well know that I applaud your efforts and hope you do not leave things broken. But, the options are not a license change or don't open source Java. You also have the option to choose an existing OSI approved license under which Java SE can be open sourced. That was the point I was making in that part of the article. I was agreeing with your public stance this past year that there are enough OSI licenses in existence that no more need to be created.
Java is now heading to its teens. With the various OS efforts you can see that it is rebelling against the restrictions that kept it in check in its youth. And like a teen there are reasons that prior restrictions won't keep it safe at home anymore. You need to find a new set of rules for it in this new stage of life. I'm hoping Sun will also continue its allowance but that also it can start earning some money on its own.