Hi!
I am now finally back from Australia after a 36 hour, which involved 4
hours waiting for a airplane to be repaired, 3 plane changes and one
missed airplane. Finally back in Finland, we got the message that our
baggage had been lost on the way :(
Australia was great, but it's real nice to be back home.
I am in this email trying to shortly comment on the questions that have
been left unanswered, in an attempt to ensure that everyone
understands my standpoint in this case.
Those that are already fed up with this discussion, please go back to
your usual business of tuning MySQL, filing bug reports or helping
other users on the MySQL email lists. Those that want a little more
background information are free to continue.
From: Thomas J Keller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> forwarded email from Britt
Johnson:
Britt> Your comments about us not participating in any meaninful fashion
Britt> in the open source community are disappointing because it means
Britt> NuSphere has not done a good job communicating its work, I believe
Britt> we provide a significant service and have allowed many people who
Britt> otherwise could not use open source software to use it because of
Britt> our work on improving windows ports, integration of components,
Britt> and major features. We contribute back fixes and improvements to
Britt> many open source communities including apache, perl, php and mysql.
Britt> Much of that work is available at no cost through downloads at our
Britt> website. I'd invite you to download and try NuSphere MySQL and
Britt> see an example of what we have done.
I found the above statement by Britt confusing. It's hard to say
what NuSphere has been doing and not done.
Apart from the crypt function, which I couldn't include in MySQL, and
some small changes required to get Gemini to work within MySQL, I
can't just now remember any patches or changes that NuSphere has
contributed to the MySQL server. If there has been any other code
contributions, they have been minor and infrequent.
Britt> The importance of our investment is reflected in Monty's own words:
Britt> "NuSphere has identified a very important technical enhancement
Britt> needed to transform MySQL into an enterprise-enabled database capable
Britt> of competing with commercial heavyweights," said Michael "Monty"
Britt> Widenius, chief technology officer of MySQL AB. "In MySQL's five-year
Britt> history, this is the most significant contribution from a source
Britt> outside MySQL AB that has ever occurred."
This is an interesting item (at least for me). The background was that
NuSphere said they would release Gemini in January 2001 and wanted to
get some publicity out of this. NuSphere emailed me the above text
and asked if I could put approve the above text for their press
release where they would announce Gemini. We at MySQL wanted (at that
time) to support them, so we said they could go ahead with the press
release, but they had to some changes, which involved changing 'THE
most' to 'one of the most' or 'a most significant'.
Another thing is also that while NuSphere delayed the release of
Gemini because of their own reasons, Heikki Tuuri at Innobase got
interested in MySQL. His table handler, InnoDB, which has been
included in the MySQL source releases since 3.23.34, is an as
important contribution as Gemini.
<cut>
Britt> As we said last January, we planned on Gemini being released
Britt> under an open source license as part of the launch of MySQL 4.0,
Britt> but that release has not shipped so we have decided to release
Britt> the source through mysql.org instead soon after its launch (the
Britt> community needs to setup CVS to support that effort). Note that
Britt> Gemini has both commercial and open source licenses just like
Britt> MySQL itself and the products we are currently shipping are
Britt> provided with a commercial license of Gemini. We absolutely
Britt> believe we have the right to do this.
We offered NuSphere to be included into the MySQL 3.23 release, just
like BDB and InnoDB, but NuSphere was not interested.
Britt seams to have missed to inform you here about one basic flaw in
the above argument.
The reason we at MySQL can provide MySQL under an open source and a
commercial license is that the we have the copyright to all the GPL
MySQL server code except Berkeley DB (which is not really GPL, but has
a strict copyright), Gemini and InnoDB. This gives us the right to
release the code under a standard commercial license, as long as we
don't include any of the above components, without an approval from
the copyright holders, into this release. We do have such agreements
with InnoDB and and understanding of how to do this with the Berkeley
DB people.
NuSphere has the same benefit. They can release Gemini without MySQL
under a commercial license. They can't not release Gemini with MySQL
under any not GPL compatible license.
The above statement by Britt is a clear violation of the GPL license.
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html
The above link should show that our interpretation of the GPL license
is the same as the one used by the Free Software Foundation.
For those that are interested in this should look at the statements
about licensing at
http://www.nusphere.com/licensing.htm
this is interesting reading. Especially the following:
---------
Q: Can I use MySQL without paying NuSphere a license fee?
A: Our products come with source code for generic MySQL without
Gemini. If you build MySQL yourself, you are free to distribute it
without incurring a license fee. If, however, you use Enhanced
MySQL, the version of MySQL that has the NuSphere Gemini table type
compiled, you will need to pay us a license fee.
Q: Can I copy NuSphere's products freely and distribute them?
A: No, NuSphere's software products are all proprietary,
copyrighted works with licenses that limit distribution. They
cannot be freely copied. The download and CDROM versions of our
products, including NuSphere MySQL and the entire Advantage product
line, cannot be freely copied.
Q: I think all software should be completely free - why isn't
NuSphere's?
A: NuSphere believes all software cannot be completely free. We
contribute to Open Source projects that provide free versions of
their software. Individuals who do not wish to pay to use specific
software are encouraged to join those communities.
----------
I find the above to be a strange interpretation of the GPL license.
********
>From "Britt Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Britt> Please consider these facts when you try to understand
Britt> NuSphere's rights and motivations - we actually worked hard to
Britt> get the details in writing before we even started the company
Britt> and we paid real money. It is under this agreement that we
Britt> believe we have a clear right to use mysql.org.
The total work involved when making the Interim agreement was done
within hours (It was just one and a fourth page long). The Interim
agreement looks, feels and smells like a Interim agreement that needs
to be replaced with something solid as soon as possible (which was the
intention). This will become quite clear when (and if) we get an OK
to publish the interim agreement from our lawyers.
********
From: "Robert John Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Robert> The contract was signed, if I recall correctly, in Bedford
Robert> MA, so the laws of the state of MA will apply. I don't
Robert> know anything about business law in MA, but I know that
Robert> American common law uses the principle that a contract is
Robert> not binding unless both parties provide something of value.
Robert> I know what NuSphere was supposed to privide under the contract:
Robert> $2.5 million. What MySQL AB was supposed to privide in return
Robert> has never been explained. I know that in reality NuSphere
Robert> paid ~$350,000. I have no idea what it received in return,
Robert> if anything.
The contract was signed over fax from Sweden and we never got
a signed copy back.
The basic deal of the interim agreement was that NuSphere should get
some of the goodwill of the announcement of MySQL going GPL, just like
VA-Linux did. Until we could reach a final agreement (estimated to 3
months in the future) we gave NuSphere limited use to the MySQL
trademark, as long as we got the right to approve all public
statements that involved MySQL in any way.
I hope that this clarifies my original statement that NuSphere has
never paid anything to MySQL for development of the MySQL server. The
money they paid above was to be part of the GPL announcement and get
some of the services we provide for them. We did use the money to hire
new developers, but this was done based on our decision, not something
that was part of the deal.
************
From: "Andy Woolley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Andy> I have been using MySQL for many years and I am now wondering if there
Andy> actually is a difference between MySQL and MySQL AB simply because mysql.org
Andy> are implying such a fact. Their web site is also giving me the impression
Andy> that they are responsible for the development of MySQL.I know Nusphere have
Andy> given both time and money to the development of MySQL but I really don't
Andy> think it quite justifies building a web site with the intention of deceiving
Andy> users that may not know the full history of MySQL.
NuSphere has certainly spent money to promote the NuSphere MySQL
combination mark and develop Gemini, but they haven't spent any
notable time or money to improve any parts of the MySQL server
code.
I totally agree with you that the mysql.org web site is very
misleading and thats why I strongly oppose it!
If NuSphere would be sincere, they would not have launched this as
mysql.org but instead done a community site at nusphere.org.
Trying to impersonate as the creators of MySQL is not really in
the best spirit of open source.
-------------
From: Jeremy Zawodny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jeremy> And some (many?) of us realize that NuSphere has a done some
Jeremy> incredible work in an effort to take MySQL up a notch. NuSphere's
Jeremy> talent and responsiveness was clear to me during the Gemini beta
Jeremy> program.
Yes, NuSphere has put a lot of work into Gemini, and when they finally
release this under GPL we have to be grateful for their contribution.
Note however that the beta program was done according to the community
principles. Even the beta program should have been GPL and open,
as we do at MySQL AB and InnoDB has done.
I would be much happier if NuSphere would concentrate on making their
contribution more worthwhile than spend their efforts in gaining
control over the code we at MySQL AB have written and the name we come
up with.
I am also very interested to see which parts of Gemini NuSphere is going
to release under GPL.
Regards,
Monty
PS: Thanks for all support. If anyone thinks I am unfair in any of the
comments above, feel free to write privately to me about this and
I will try to correct myself in future postings. It's quite hard
to keep ones temper in check when one is burning with passion to
defend oneself and the thing one has been part of creating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
