Well, yes. Devs in that environment would not go near it (at least not for anything beyond a POC). In those environments, you have to go through a review board process in order to use some new open source JSON-parser library from Maven Central. Devs aren't just cowboy'ing a new compiler into their workflow.
"Production use requires a license" is a NOT an indicator that it's ready for production use (there are a number of warnings against this). The fact that you need a license, yet can't get one, is a clear signal that it isn't ready for production use. The people in Oracle's target audience see this sort of thing a lot with preview software, and aren't confused by it.
> The fact that you need a license, yet can't get one, is a clear signal that it isn't ready for production use.
Everything you said is reasonable except this. If it isn’t ready for production use then no need to beat about the bush by advertising a commercial license you can’t get? And if one doesn’t exist by the way how are Twitter using it in production?
I honestly don't know how to explain this more clearly. They are not "advertising a commercial license". They are saying NOT to use the Enterprise version in production, because licensing is not yet available.
The only reference I've ever seen to Twitter using GraalVM in production is in this discussion thread. And that commenter clearly states that Twitter is using the open-source community edition.
No one who would ever conceivably be a paying Oracle customer would be confused by any of this. When that much money is on the table, there are experienced people in the room with reading comprehension.
"Production use requires a license" is a NOT an indicator that it's ready for production use (there are a number of warnings against this). The fact that you need a license, yet can't get one, is a clear signal that it isn't ready for production use. The people in Oracle's target audience see this sort of thing a lot with preview software, and aren't confused by it.