Michael Widenius wrote:
>
> Hi!
Moin Monty,
dear fence-guests,
> Please note that we NEVER have asked NuSphere to sign over copyright
> of Gemini to us. We do it only for the core server, and this is
> actually not an uncommon thing among open source companies. For
> example QT (Trolltech) and Ximian (a lot of gnome applications) does
> the same thing. Assigning over the code is also something that FSF
> requires for all code contributions. If you criticize us at MySQL AB,
> you should also criticize the above.
I should not criticize the others and Trond already explained
why (thank you).
All I was doing was summing up some of the latest press
releases from NuSphere and MySQL AB. You as CTO and your own
CEO have explained detailed enough why the assignment of
copyright for all core system related code is so important
for your company because of your business modell. As the
original banker I am, and as the 13+ year IT consultant I am,
I don't have the slightest problem with that and understand
it completely. It's not my business at all anyway, so it
doesn't matter if I personally think it's good or not.
But NuSphere said, that the problem with contributing the
Gemini code was because of the copyright questions. Looking
at the code now and realizing that it's part of the Progress
storage system fits perfectly. NuSphere might have had
permission from Progress to release it under the GPL, but not
to assign the copyright to MySQL AB. The copyright of parts
of the Gemini code is still property of Progress (Britt
please come down from the fence and correct me if I'm wrong
here).
> I had actually hoped to get support from you guy's at PostgreSQL
> regarding this. You may have similar experience or at least
> understand our position. The RedHat database may be a good thing for
> PostgreSQL, but I am not sure if it's a good thing for RedHat or for
> the main developers to PostgreSQL. Anyway, I think that we open source
> developers should stick together. We may have our own disagreements,
> but at least we are working for the same common goal (open source
> domination).
The RedHAT database IS PostgreSQL. And I don't see it
becoming something different. All I've seen up to now is that
RedHAT will be a contributing member of the PostgreSQL open
source community in the same way, PostgreSQL Inc. and Great
Bridge LLC are. That they use BIG RED letters while GB uses
BIG BLUE ones and PgSQL Inc. a bavarian mix for the
marketing, yeah - that's marketing - these folks like logos
and colors. The real difference will mature somehow in the
service portfolios over time. And since there are many
different customers with a broad variety of demands, we'll
all find more food than we can eat. No need to fight against
each other.
The major advantage in the PostgreSQL case is, that we don't
need no dispute about licensing, because whoever thinks he
can make a deal out of keeping something proprietary is
allowed to. People contributing under the BSD license are
just self-confident enough to know that this will become a
niche solution or die anyway.
And there we are at the point about "support regarding THIS".
If you're asking for support for the MySQL project, well, I
created two procedural languages in PostgreSQL so far and
know enough about the query rewriting techniques used by
Stonebraker and his team to implement views in PostgreSQL.
As the open source developer I am, I might possibly find one
or the other spare hour to create something similar. The
reason I did it for PostgreSQL was because a couple of years
ago Bruce Momjian asked me to fix the rule system. Noone ever
asked me to do anything for MySQL. But if you're asking for
direct support for your company, sorry, but I'm a Great
Bridge employee and that's clearly against my interests.
> Jan> But maybe Mr. Mickos told the truth, that there never have
> Jan> been substantial contributions from the outside and nearly
> Jan> all the code has been written by "Monty" himself (with little
> Jan> "donations" from David). In that case, NuSphere's launch of
> Jan> mysql.org was long overdue.
>
> Why do you think that?
>
> MySQL AB is a totally open source company. Everything we develop and
> sell we also put on open source. I think we have are doing and have
> always done the right thing for the open source community.
That is what your CEO said on NewsForge, SlashDot and
whereever. I am committed to free source. Thus I think that
the best thing for open source is a free community, which and
who's product is not controlled by any commercial entity.
> I don't think it's really fair to be compare us to NuSphere :(
Did I? That wasn't my intention. And nothing I wrote was
meant personally. Even if the PostgreSQL and MySQL projects
had some differences in the past, there has never been
something between Monty and Jan (not to my knowledge).
Let's meet next week at O'Reilly (you're there, aren't you)
and have a beer.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] #
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
