MySQL 4.X
Hi. I have been awayv for a while. I see that 3.23 is still listed as the current distribution version. When might one expect that 4.X will be released as a production version? MySQL, versions - 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
Re: mysql.org
John Birrell wrote: On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 12:29:52PM -0400, Britt Johnston wrote: MySQL AB and NuSphere had a meeting over the phone, we exchanged information and opinions and NuSphere will propose times for the next meeting. Since these issues are between two private companies, please take your discussions off this list. It is none of our business. By all means, tell us the result. With all due respect, John, I for one absolutely disagree with you on this. I want to be kept as informed as MySQL AB and NuSphere are willing to keep me. I'd be willing to bet there are a sufficient number of participants here who agree with me. Tom Keller mysql? query? database? huh? - 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
re: mysql.org
Well, I have gone and looked more closely at mysql.org. I am forced to confess that I find several disheartening features at this site. I am unwilling at this juncture to typify these issues as deliberate or ill-intentioned, but I will say that NuSphere needs to make a concerted, immediate effort to resolve these points. 1) While they do point out that they are not affliated, and provide a link to MySQL AB, they do not state why this is relevant, or why someone might WANT to go to MySQL AB. 2) They do not explicitly claim to be the developers of MySQL, but they also do not explicitly state that they are not. While experienced MySQL users would recognize this fact, new-comers or persons searching for information in support of a product decision would most likely not recognize that distinction. 3) The tone and content of the requests for participation and assistance in development do suggest that participating in the NuSphere mysql.org development effort is identical to participating in MySQL development, which is clearly not the case. In my opinion, Nusphere needs to take the following actions immediately: 1) Explicitly and prominently identify on their front page, the ownership of the MySQL trademark as belonging to MySQL AB, and point at the mysql.com website. 2) Clearly delineate the difference between NuSphere MySQL and MySQL, on the front page, and prominently. 3) Cause their site not to resemble mysql.com in any way related to design or format. 4) NuSphere needs to clarify the extent and nature of their investments in MySQL. Investment in their inhouse products does not qualify as investment in the MySQL server product. Monies paid to MySQL AB, subject to the details of whatever agreements said monies were paid under, may qualify. None of these are onerous, and doing these things will go a long way to putting NuSphere back into good graces with this community and with the folks at MySQL AB. As a separate issue, I will offer my comments re: the domain name/trademark dispute: It is my opinion that regardless of what rights NuSphere may believe, correctly or otherwise, they have to the use of the MySQL trademark, that the only honorable and acceptable action for them to take is to transfer the domain name to MySQL AB immediately. This is a matter of ethics and courtesy (and good PR), not legality. As for the issue of trademark infringement and protection, it is true that failure to take appropriate legal action to defend a trademark can, and sometimes does, lead to loss of legal protection for that trademark. This being the case, NuSphere and MySQL AB need to work up a written agreement which asserts that the trademark MySQL does explicitly belong to MySQL AB, and that NuSphere formally acknowledges that ownership. Such an agreement gives MySQL AB proof of defense, which is their largest single concern (in my interpretation). The actual use of the trademark by NuSphere is an issue that should be settled betwen NuSphere and MySQL, or in the courts, if that unfortunate necessity arises. - 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
re: mysql.org
Alright. I have received Mr. Johnson's permission to share the email response he made to me. it is included herewith for informational purposes without comment or prejudice: cut here NOTE: personal opening comments removed for brevity mysql.org has not been publically announced and it will take some time for it to become the thriving community it is destined to be. My hope is that rather than fighting it, you can join it and be part of an even more vibrant mysql community. It is disappointing that our friends from MySQL AB seem threatened by the creation of noncommercial site to promote mysql that they jump in and announce it themselves to the world and claim they were not informed. The facts are they were informed and invited to participate, their response is what you have read. You mention specifically that you believe we have no right to the domain name. The facts are that we believe we have a right under an agreement that was signed by both Monty and David that provided us with broad rights to mysql related names. In fact we paid a significant sum of money for the ability to use those names and other items and that same agreement in fact required MySQL to be released under the GPL. Now that MySQL AB has taken on venture capital funding and hired new management, they want to ignore those agreements. Your comments about us not participating in any meaninful fashion in the open source community are disappointing because it means NuSphere has not done a good job communicating its work, I believe we provide a significant service and have allowed many people who otherwise could not use open source software to use it because of our work on improving windows ports, integration of components, and major features. We contribute back fixes and improvements to many open source communities including apache, perl, php and mysql. Much of that work is available at no cost through downloads at our website. I'd invite you to download and try NuSphere MySQL and see an example of what we have done. The importance of our investment is reflected in Monty's own words: NuSphere has identified a very important technical enhancement needed to transform MySQL into an enterprise-enabled database capable of competing with commercial heavyweights, said Michael Monty Widenius, chief technology officer of MySQL AB. In MySQL's five-year history, this is the most significant contribution from a source outside MySQL AB that has ever occurred. We also support the community by sponsoring and helping organize events such as the OSCON 2001 with O'Reilly, Open Source Database Summit with OSDN, and the Linux Legacy through Geek Cruises to name a few. We are proud of the significant investment we make in these areas so that the open source community can meet and learn from each other face to face. As we said last January, we planned on Gemini being released under an open source license as part of the launch of MySQL 4.0, but that release has not shipped so we have decided to release the source through mysql.org instead soon after its launch (the community needs to setup CVS to support that effort). Note that Gemini has both commercial and open source licenses just like MySQL itself and the products we are currently shipping are provided with a commercial license of Gemini. We absolutely believe we have the right to do this. In closing, I hope you will take a moment to see things from our perspective and understand that we want a strong mysql community as strong as apache or php and one that is not controlled by a single commercial company. Thanks for your time, Britt... -- D. Britton Johnston 603-578-6707 Nashua Chief Technology Officer 781-280-4954 Bedford NuSphere Corporation 781-280-4600 Main 14 Oak Park 781-280-4646 Fax Bedford, MA 01730 www.nusphere.com cut here - 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
Re: mysql.org
Marten Mickos wrote: In response to the posting by Thomas J Keller of Britt Johnston's text, I feel I have to come with the following comments. (The quoted text marked with is by Britt Johnston) mysql.org has not been publically announced and it will take some time for it to become the thriving community it is destined to be. My hope is that rather than fighting it, you can join it and be part of an even more vibrant mysql community. We do not oppose communities that form around a common interest in our product. But we do mind if our trademark is used without authorisation. So we are not fighting the community, we are fighting the violations of our rights. Is there any reason for not operating the site under the nusphere.org name or some other name? Now on this point, in consideration of the assertions of a temporary agreement which MySQL AB asserts to have formally terminated, NuSphere would appear to be violating MySQL AB's trademark. Marten's question regarding another name is quite proper. Unless NuSphere can provide solid evidence that there is a current formal agreement in force at this time, my opinion (humble, not huble, or otherwise *grin*) is that NuSphere should post-haste transfer mysql.org to MySQL AB. This is a sticky legal point, since both parties would appear to have differing interpretations of the nature, term and status of any agreement between them. It is disappointing that our friends from MySQL AB seem threatened by the creation of noncommercial site to promote mysql that they jump in and announce it themselves to the world and claim they were not informed. The facts are they were informed and invited to participate, their response is what you have read. The last sentence is untrue. MySQL AB was not invited, nor informed of this. The last record we have that relates to mysql.org is from early June when we asked NuSphere to transfer the domain to us, and Lorne Cooper replied that NuSphere refuses to do so. He also noted that NuSphere had not populated the site. We do not oppose any creation of a concommercial site to promote the MySQL server. But we do mind ... (see my comment above). Another point where the two parties would appear to have differing interpretations of events. You mention specifically that you believe we have no right to the domain name. The facts are that we believe we have a right under an agreement that was signed by both Monty and David that provided us with broad rights to mysql related names. In fact we paid a significant sum of money for the ability to use those names and other items and that same agreement in fact required MySQL to be released under the GPL. Now that MySQL AB has taken on venture capital funding and hired new management, they want to ignore those agreements. There WAS an interim agreement from June 2000 to be replaced within 3 months by a final agreement. We have confirmed to NuSphere in writing the termination of the interim agreement. It has not been in force for some time. For the records, it was only David Axmark who signed it and faxed it to Progress. Progress or NuSphere have never sent us a version with their signatures. This is in essence the same differing interpretation problem as noted above. When it was in force, the interim agreement did NOT provide NuSphere with broad rights to use the MySQL name. Under the agreement, Progress paid a total of USD 312,501 with the last check being cut in September 2000. See http://www.mysql.com/news/article-75.html for more information on this. Well, in the face of radically different interpretations, I see a few possible ways to resolve this: First: take it to court. Potentially expensive, and probably not good for public relations for either party. Second: (and I fully note that there could be any number of valid and compelling reasons for either or both parties to find this suggestion untenable) post the text of the agreement here, for the community to peruse. This suggestion carries with it an implicit expectation that the parties would be expected to abide by the opinion of the community (assuming an overwhelming majority interpret the agreement one way over another). Third: NuSphere could, in the interests of peace within the community, transfer the domain name to MySQL AB, and MySQL AB could back off the GPL violation issue (this presumes that NuSphere brings themselves into compliance with GPL immediately). Intent is an important issue here. It is entirely possible that NuSphere understood their procedures to be in compliance with GPL, and that MySQL believes them not to be, with both parties acting in good faith. NuSphere can confirm their good faith by accepting that their release is problematic and rectifying the situation immediately. MySQL AB can confirm their good faith by accepting this gesture and relenting on the GPL licensing issue. The comment by Britt on vc funding
re: mysql.org
The more I think about this, the more convinced I am that someone needs to offer the following observations: It is unfortunate that so many people within this community are so eager to assume the worst about a company, simply because they ARE a company. Not all corporations are Mickey$lu$h (I guess my biases in this regard are obvious), and not all corporate leaders are Bill Gates. Bring in business to make a profit is not a bad thing. One might note that David and Monty are in business to make a profit, and by their own statements, this was always their intent. Good on them! As has been pointed out by several people, including myself, some of the issues involved in this dispute are very tricky and difficult to understand, even if one had ALL the relevant information to hand. The fact is that very few (perhaps 3?) of the participants in this brouhaha have more than a modicum of real information available to them. There have been comments made by both parties which are arguably less than totally correct. There have also been many comments made that perhaps should not have been. Big surprise, with both money and pride involved, people get hot under the collar when others don't see things THEIR way! The people who tend to become involved heavily in the Open Source community are often highly opinionated (who, ME?!) and quick to form judgements. This can work against us as a community when it leads to the kinds of recrminations and attacks we have seen here. The unfortunate truth is that when millions or billions of dollars are on the line, and when highly sophisticated legal concepts such as intellectual property and licensing are involved, it often requires people with special training (OK, I'll say it: lawyers) to sort things out. It is important to realize also that all any lawyer can do is offer their opinion and interpretation of the law. Only the Courts can offer a final statement as to the actual meanings of laws, and even then, things are seldom clear cut. Remember that laws have no inherent validity or meaning. They are abstract intellectual creations dreamed up by human beings, and are subject to the inherent inefficiencies of language. I seriously doubt that anyone from either of these companies has any nefarious intentions. Although some things have been said on both sides which may turn out not to be true, I rather suspect that this is due to differences of opinion, coupled with a little anger, rather than intentional mendacity. So...the upshot of all this, I suppose is: cool off, everyone. Let's see if the folks at MySQL AB and NuSphere can resolve this to their mutual satisfaction. Above all, PLEASE, let's stop calling each other names. None of us are little children here. tom - 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
Re: Strange pseudo-coded query
Rolf Hopkins wrote: This is way off topic and you should seek an MS Access help list. Excuse me. I am working in MySQL. I see no reference whatever to MS Access in my message. How do you figure this is off topic? [Zip Code Distance Extractor] could refer to any number of diff things such as a column in a table, a table name, a field on a form. I suppose it could. There is no such table or column listed in the documentation that comes with this product. The ! also has several different meanings and you should be able to find it in help files. Help files for what? According to the books I have, the ! means NOT in the context of a SELECT clause. - 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
Strange pseudo-coded query
I am working with a commercially supplied database of zipcode numbers and related data. In the documentation, the following pseudo-coded SQL queries are included. I am mystified by two things here: 1) [Zip Code Distance Extractor] -- I have no clue as to what this is referring to 2) the use of the ! operator makes no sense to me in this context help? Thanks in advance... --- included text --- Programming Notes Zip Code Distance Calculator Tables: 1. CPA Firms Table (CPAFIRMS) Fields: 1) First Name 2) Middle Name 3) Last Name 4) Company 5) Address 1 6) Address 2 7) City 8) State 9) Zip Code 10 digit 10) Delivery Point 11) County 12) Code Number 13) Zip Code 5 digit 2. Zip Code Latitude Longitude Table (ZIP-LAT-LONG) Fields: 1) Zip Code 5 digit 2) Latitude 3) Longitude 4) City 5) State 6) County Queries: 1. Find Center Zip Code Finds matching Latitude/Longitude from ZIP-LAT-LONG table. SQL CODE: SELECT [ZIP-LAT-LONG].[ZIP CODE], [ZIP-LAT-LONG].LATITUDE, [ZIP-LAT-LONG].LONGITUDE FROM [ZIP-LAT-LONG] WHERE ((([ZIP-LAT-LONG].[ZIP CODE])=[Forms]![Zip Code Distance Extractor]![Zip Code])); 2. Find Distance Calculates Distance from Center Zip Code Query against Zip Codes in the ZIP-LAT-LONG table. SQL CODE: SELECT [ZIP-LAT-LONG].[ZIP CODE], [ZIP-LAT-LONG].LATITUDE, [ZIP-LAT-LONG].LONGITUDE, ([ZIP-LAT-LONG]! [LATITUDE]-[FIND CENTER ZIP CODE]![LATITUDE])*69.1 AS [Distance Lat], (69.1*([ZIP-LAT-LONG]! [LONGITUDE]-[FIND CENTER ZIP CODE]![LONGITUDE])*(Cos([FIND CENTER ZIP CODE]![LATITUDE]/57.3))) AS [Distance Long], ((([Distance Lat]^2)+([Distance Long]^2))^0.5) AS Distance FROM [ZIP-LAT-LONG], [FIND CENTER ZIP CODE]; 3. Find Distance by Radius Limits the results of the Find Distance Query by the radius number. SQL CODE: SELECT [Find Distance].Distance, [CPAFIRM'S].COMPANY, [CPAFIRM'S].FIRST, [CPAFIRM'S].MIDDLE, [CPAFIRM'S].LAST, [CPAFIRM'S].ADDRESS1, [CPAFIRM'S].ADDRESS2, [CPAFIRM'S].CITY, [CPAFIRM'S].STATE, [CPAFIRM'S].ZIPCODE FROM ([Find Distance] INNER JOIN [ZIP-LAT-LONG] ON [Find Distance].[ZIP CODE] = [ZIP-LAT-LONG].[ZIP CODE]) INNER JOIN [CPAFIRM'S] ON [ZIP-LAT-LONG].[ZIP CODE] = [CPAFIRM'S].ZIP5 WHERE ((([Find Distance].Distance)=[Forms]![Zip Code Distance Extractor]![radius])) ORDER BY [Find Distance].Distance; --- end included text --- - 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
SQL query problem
I am using two versions of MySQL, on two different platforms, and having the same problem on both. One very odd aspect of this problem is that it behaves precisely the same way on both platforms, down to which records are garbled onscreen and how they are garbled. Anyone with any ideas? Thanks in advance Platforms: RedHat Linux 6.1 MySQL Ver. 3.23.28gamma (locally compiled) FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE MySQL Ver. 3.22.32 Problem: when I use the following query, I get garbled data in the MySQL command line client: select zip, city, county from zipcodes where zip between 68400 and 68500; here is a portion of the garbled output: |68442 | STELLA | RICHARDSON |43 | STERLING | JOHNSON |444 | STRANG | FILLMORE |5 | SWANTON | SALINE || SYRACUSE | OTOE |7 | TABLE ROCK | PAWNEE || TALMAGE | OTOE |50 | TECUMSEH | JOHNSON || ONG | CLAY |3 | TOBIAS | SALINE || UNADILLA | OTOE || UNION| CASS |6 | UTICA| SEWARD |68457 | VERDON | RICHARDSON || VIRGINIA | GAGE || WACO | YORK |8461 | WALTON | LANCASTER |8462 | WAVERLY | LANCASTER || WEEPING WATER| CASS |4 | WESTERN | SALINE |5 | WILBER | SALINE || WYMORE | GAGE || YORK | YORK +---+--+-+ BUT, if I use: select zip, city, county from zipcodes where zip = 68465; for example I get: |68465 | WILBER | SALINE This holds for any specific zipcode in the database. There is one range, 68500 through 58600 which display correctly. Oddly enough, that is the range for the city I am in. The zipcodes database looks like this: mysql desc zipcodes; +---++--+-+-+---+-+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | Privileges | +---++--+-+-+---+-+ | zip | int(11)| | PRI | 0 | | select,insert,update,references | | latitude | float(7,4) | YES | | NULL| | select,insert,update,references | | longitude | float(8,4) | YES | | NULL| | select,insert,update,references | | city | text | YES | | NULL| | select,insert,update,references | | state | text | YES | | NULL| | select,insert,update,references | | county| text | YES | | NULL| | select,insert,update,references | +---++--+-+-+---+-+ 6 rows in set (0.00 sec) This is a commercial database product named ZipPLUS. I also tried this: mysql check table zipcodes; ++---+--+--+ | Table | Op| Msg_type | Msg_text | ++---+--+--+ | build.zipcodes | check | status | OK | ++---+--+--+ 1 row in set (0.91 sec) - 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
