Slashdot Mirror
Monty Wants To Save MySQL
An anonymous reader writes "It seems as if the MySQL author is trying hard to win back control over MySQL. In his blog he calls upon the MySQL users to 'Help keep the Internet free' by signing his petition. He fears that if Oracle buys Sun they automatically get MySQL which would spell doom for the project. But I have have mixed feelings with this call for help, because after all — who sold MySQL in the first place?"
...First at last
For the sake of topic titles, I'd rather if Monty saved Python.
we still have pgsql, right? yeah, migration, but still free/libre, right? first post? nah...
Buanzo Consulting - 15 Years of GNU/Linux experience, for you.
is the web going to be unrecognizable in 2020 or will monty still keep it free?
Will this show up every 2 weeks on /.
Maybe he shouldn't had sold it in the first time, so he wouldn't be crying it back now?
It's like you broke up with your girlfriend and then go crying her back when she has found a new guy, while you're having no luck.
I, too, would love to sell something for a billion dollars and then have it given back.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
take the money and run...
He also spammed everybody who's ever been dumb enough to let him get anywhere near their e-mail address with the same self-serving, hypocritical screed...
This has been hashed out before. Monty wants to force the legitimate owner of MySQL to give up its rights to the documentation and proprietary parts of the source code so he can deploy his own commercial product using MariaDB. It's that simple. He got a big payoff when he cashed out and now he wants to double dip by getting back for free what he has already been compensated for.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Why doesn't he just fork the whole project? He is the original author so many contributors would likely follow him. That would be a much easier way to maintain some control IMHO.
I read the blog/petition last week. (What else is there to do at work between Christmas and New Year's?)
I understand the concern - that MySQL will be an in-house "competitor" for resources to Oracle's database. However, why wouldn't they be complimentary?
Also, since a large portion of the original MySQL is OSS, then I see no reason an entity couldn't take it and create a forked product to compete in that space. This would be like Websphere and Apache co-existing. IBM goes after the corporate market and Apache goes after the rest.
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
How intellectually lazy is it to say there won't be a free DB? Do I want to migrate from MySQL to PG? No. But, if the economics of MySQL become prohibitive, it's not like I'm going to kill myself over it. I'm going to move on.
If the existing solutions aren't good enough, then a new solution will emerge. That's economics. The niche is already proven by MySQL. If MySQL ceases to fill that niche, it won't be long before something else fills it.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
Vot about Rommel?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
He got paid a large amount of money for MySQL, and now he's not satisfied. MySQL is under GPL v. 2, so there isn't a problem. If Sun takes it in a bad direction, it can be forked.
Find free books.
Hypocrite Monty.
Give back the billion dollars and we may talk.
don't Monty me on this deal!
If you had never sold MySQL to Sun in the first place, it wouldn't be in the position it is now in. I hope the money was worth it.
Why are you so concerned now? Your chance to do something came and went, and so did you.
Also, I rather think you overrate MySQL in that petition post, but thats just mho.
It's called PostgreSQL. It's fast, what's even more important, it's correct and it's tried and tested. Get it here.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
He wants to build another business on MySQL and force Oracle into letting him do it.
This is greed masquerading as virtue.
He got his money and now he sees an opportunity to get his code back that he sold and the shyster is doing what he can to get it back.
He has his own db, MariaDB and if it's any good then he shouldn't care since its whole purpose is that it's a replacement to MySQL.
I've also noticed he's not allowing comments on his blog that counter his points no matter how mature and well presented they are.
I really hope Oracle gets the ok, if for any reason to shit in this guy's Cheerios. I won't have anything to do anything he's working on.
"In January, 2008, Sun legally acquired MySQL for $1 billion."
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Why? Because the alleged shortcommings of PostgreSQL can be solved and it is far more superior to MySQL when it comes to supporting partial indexes. MySQL would not know how to handle this.
Since InnoDB (the only proper storage engine in the default MySQL distribution) is owned by Oracle already, why bother?
this look pretty much like many old cheats: My Sql was sold for 1 Billion dollars and now he would like to get it back.... for free. ....and was Sun really so stupid to pay all that money for the mysql "brand" without asking any clauses ?
the real questions anyway, are others :
Who would trust and donate code to a project managed by such a man ?
Seriously, you have to be a moron to take him seriously at this point. Anyone who is motivated to protect something like he claims to be in protecting MySQL does not sell off the rights to a multinational corporation, especially not one in constant turmoil like Sun has been for several years. If he wanted to protect MySQL, what he would have done is tried to turn the company into a non-profit like Mozilla.
Folks, I read the petition before commenting. There are options on what to do, and one of them is to release it to an independent entity "MySQL must be divested to a suitable third party that can continue to develop it under the GPL." That certainly doesn't have to be him. It does provide a very effective low cost alternative and I can't see Oracle putting a lot of effort into a competing product.
If he'd wanted to retain control then why did he sell mySQL to Sun? Once that sale was completed he gave up his rights and claims. He certainly didn't have a problem with a corporation owning it in exchange for a cool billion earlier.
What Sun said they wanted to do with it is immaterial; Monty's rights to do anything more than complain vocally were terminated by his own hand the instant he signed the contract, and were made irreversible when he deposited that check.
The fact of the matter is that Oracle doesn't give more than about a shit-and-a-half about mySQL. Oracle cares about Enterprise installations and mySQL not only ain't there now, it never will be. Even Foxbase^W^H MS SQL Server spanks it 37 ways to next Tuesday in Enterprise and Data Warehousing environments.
Meanwhile, if mySQL really is and has remained open source, then it's still open, so Monty should STFU and fork it already. If not, then he himself killed it and there's no one else to blame.
Once you sell your 2CV to someone, you have no more say in what's done with the car, even if it turns out to have been bought by Top Gear and they want to blow it up. Once you take the money, you don't get to complain anymore. If it had meant that much to Monty then why did he sell?
Cake: have vs. eat.
The comment moderation on his blog is just icing on that cake -- only comments supporting poor, ickle widdle Monty's untenable position are allowed through.
And for those who still refuse to change the "evil Oracle" record, The base Oracle DB charge is $350 (Std) / $950 (Ent) per user or $17,500 (Std) / $47,500 (Ent) per processor -- annually, not including required support and other charges -- Oracle doesn't give a shit about mySQL and the paltry few thousand that supporting it might bring in.
If it's really still Open Sauce and the community doesn't like what happens with it then mySQL will fork. Again. Except that it will need a new core team since the current core team has bills to pay and enjoys employment during an economic mess.
So rather than ask for it back, why doesn't he offer to buy it back for the same amount that he was paid for it?
This sounds too much like like greed to me.
The choices on the petition are laughable as well. MySQL is already GPL. If Oracle does try to kill it, there is nothing to stop another company from forking it (aren't there several forks already) and providing commercial support & development. Asking Oracle to do work on it, and then release that work for free, is also stupid. Oracle is a company which wants to make money. Why should they develop competition to their main product and then release it for free?
So MySQL sold for a cool $1 billion in whatever it was, and now he wants to get it back for free? This is so funny it may just work.
Wow, must be nice to be as famous as Madonna and no longer need a last name.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
I think that this database must be free,but also more and more software,i'm going to the petition page
He apparently went through the database of everyone who had ever submitted a bug report and vacuumed up email addresses, because that's the only way he would have known me to send me his appeal. That's not stooping low: that's slithering.
Having seen the date 1969-12-31 one time too many, I say let the fucker die.
DIE DIE DIE!
I hate HATE HATE HATE mysql.
(why yes, I have recently been replaying FF VI. Why do you ask?)
Sometimes I wish MySQL had less cheese in it.
It looks to me more like "I had to destroy MySQL in order to save it". He is (IMHO) not doing anyone a favor.....
Taking Monty at face value he seems to be saying Mysql was such a dynamic open source poject because of the way it was funded (a GPL codebase with a propriety licence for any one willing to pay), giving it lots of cash to develop (enabling full-time developers to work on the code base). Mysql (in Montys view) was not like Linux that had a distributed development effort behind it.
Taking him at face value this seems to be a weekness in Mysql development model, the Oracle buy out is a case in point.
Not taking him at face value however is Groklaw I think her assessment is a little harsh (not because I know Monty personally, I dont) as there is a reasonable explanation for his actions outlined in the Groklaw artical. He's trying to stop Oracle from Buying Sun and therefore mysql, as he can not see Oracle supporting mysql. Why would a company buy out a competitor, whose product makes less profit than theirs, and support it, even though it will take customers from their more lucrative products.
I say this because with the accusations against Monty are strong and need to be proven in non contradictory ways.
All of you who are mindful that MySQL is Sun's stuff, bought and paid for, and who are impugning the author of MySQL with ulterior motives, do not seem to realize that, however dark and dank the MySQL author's motives might be, Oracle's motives can only be worse and it has high-powered lawyers on retainer to back them up. If Oracle chooses to lock up the code of MySQL, a lot of database users may find themselves up the creek with no recourse whatever.
It's called PostgreSQL.
MySQL has plenty of affordable shared hosting providers. What company do you recommend for hosting web sites based on PostgreSQL?
I'm not claiming to be an expert in this field, but have a simple question...
If this is GPL, can SUN stop it from continuing to be GPL? Even if they purchase SUN, doesn't the GPL have to be maintained on software once placed in the public domain? Even if Oracle took it and if they stopped development of it, it wouldn't mean that the public would have to stop developing and using it, would it? Couldn't separate efforts, much like Linux, continue this on as if nothing happened, OR is this what can happen to any GPL in the future?
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
pgsql is NOT Free Open Source! It is not GPL, so it is not truly Free. mysql is the only true community database and we must save it from corporate plunder at all costs!
Give me an example of virtue that isn't a masquerade of one kind or another.
So, Monty uses dual licensing to turn his open source software into a profitable company, sells that company for a billion dollars, and now he's suddenly concerned with freedom. Oracle buying MySQL may be bad, but I don't think Monty has much credibility in opposing it.
Background: MySQL is an open-source database used by millions. Originally developed by closely-held Swedish company MySQL AB, it was sold to Sun Microsystems Inc in January 2008. Sun is now in the process of being acquired Oracle Corporation. The deal is still awaiting European regulatory approval.
Not happy with selling MySQL AB to Sun for a cool billion, Monty Widenius is now trolling regulators, the media, and anyone who will listen in his efforts to get back control of "his" database (without having to give back the money).
European regulators still don't "get" the open-source software model
The Europeans are holding up their approval of the Sun-Oracle deal because of concerns that the acquisition will reduce competition in the database industry. Oracle Corp, which is already the dominant player in large-scale corporate databases, already "controls" several open-source database products such as Oracle Berkeley DB and the InnoDB transactional storage engine for MysQL
The reason I put "controls" in quotes is because it's very difficult to actually exert full control an open-source project, especially one that is licensed under the GPL or similar open-source license. It would probably be more accurate to say that Oracle "sponsors" both BerkeleyDB and InnoDB.
It's all about being an unabashed hypocrite
Widenius was originally able to control MySQL by insisting that the copyright for all code contributed by outsiders be assigned to MySQL AB. By doing this, Widenius was able to "dual-license" MySQL, with both a free GPL version and a paid commercial version.
This licensing scheme was good enough when Widenius was in control of MySQL AB, but now that Oracle is buying Sun, suddenly Widenius wants both the licensing scheme changed to something that would allow his new company to sell modified copies without having to release the source code for their changes, and to have Oracle turn over control of MySQL to someone other than Oracle - perhaps the EU should consider (nudge nudge, wink wink) his new company, Monty Program AB?
Calls the GPL licensing scheme an "infection", wants the EU to violate international treaties
You can read more about the attempt to get the Europeans to retroactively change the licensing scheme from the GPL to something more "Monty Widenius-friendly":
In other words, he wants the European Union to violate Articles 9 and 12 of the Bern Convention on Copyrights and retroactively change the license from the GPL, which requires him to share any changes he makes to source code covered by the GPL, to a license that would let him take from the original authors, but not give back anything in return.
When we were kids, our parents told us "share and share alike." The authors who contributed source code under the GPL adhered to this principle. If you don't want to share your changes, simply don't "borrow" their
Others include
And there are many more, relational and non-relational, out there.
you had me at #!
So exactly how many times are we going to have to read this same story again?
I have no sympathy for Mr. Widenius - after all he sold MySQL to Sun for a nice chunk of change. If you don't like it, FORK IT. But shut the hell up already.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
He made his choice: he took the cash. If he wants to change his mind, he can buy it back.
Perhaps Monty has never seen the show "Let's Make a Deal"? If the curtains open on your choice of door #1 and you've discovered you won the goat, it's too late to bargain.
Or, if it was the host that opened the door on the goat, he could switch his choice and pick door #2 (postgresql), which might be a better deal.
For all the crying about Monty's disingenuousness, Wikipedia shows the main license is still GPL, with a proprietary license available but not the only license. Presuming this is accurate (And I concede, I don't know exactly why anyone would pay a giga-buck for a GPL'd application given the inherent limitations on monetizing it in any way anyone else with access to the source could. I also don't entirely understand why one would buy a proprietary license for a GPL product? So finding out I misunderstand the situation would hardly be a shock.), um - so what. Phoenix the name, keep the code, fork the project - Oracle seems to be buying the mark, the code is open.
So, uh, who cares. The GPL is a valid license, in order to actually grab the code itself Oracle would have to file a lawsuit and retroactively 'un-GPL' it, and given the (intermittently tested, but consistent) record of the GPL as a perfectly valid license, I don't see that happening.
So . . . What am I missing that this sale is a major issue from the open-source pov?
Pug
An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
Anyone who is worried about MySQL should try postgres. If you've written your app correctly you can probably switch over seamlessly.
The easy kind?
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
He wants to build another business on MySQL and force Oracle into letting him do it.
This is greed masquerading as virtue.
took the words right out of my mouth...
He explains in the related blog post that the founders (presumably meaning Widenius and Axmark) received "less than 12% of the deal", which is quite believable.
The EUR 16 million figure is from Widenius' Wikipedia entry. (Which is famously served by MySQL.:)
In any case, this large lump of cash is only about half what Sun or Oracle would spend on MySQL R&D in just one year, and obviously a small fraction of what would be needed to buy it back - especially after the sale to Oracle is concluded, and assuming the new owner wants to sell.
you had me at #!
Sooo, To understand the basics here...
/. entry, and even the glorious Number 2 (southpark reference) has problems with his logic on property rights (when it suits his coffers).
... Now, keep sending those letters.
Monty wants to keep the internet free, and that is somehow connected to his old, crappy product being "freed" from the rightful owner. Uhuh, riiiiight.
I read the tripe of a blog-entry, and I am disgusted. This man seems to write as bad as he codes. Aside from quite healthy competition, PostgreSQL comes to mind. Especially the feature of stored procedures (don't bitch, I am sure they included that after Monty sold it.)
First and foremost, I need to point out the painfully obvious:
The Infrastructure of the Internet is NOT free. The pipes are owned by companies, and they can rightfully charge for the usage. No second-rate celebunerd can change that. You have to be be BONO to be recognized beyond a casual
To add to that, Oracle, in all their evil splendor, has the complete right, if it owns SUN, to modify, improve, abolish any and all property that came with the purchase. Who knows, maybe they will turn MySQL into something usable by serious programmers! Oh, wait, they HAVE a product, closed source, that has been established to work for decades, and that profitable companies pay good money for when it comes to managing data... I am shocked and awed!
I know this is a very difficult thing to understand for you young freetards out there: Stuff costs money. Things and services. Like iPods, cleaning cars, using the turnpike, going to the pool, beer, hookers, and other fun stuff.
And again, why is there no concerted effort to produce a GOOD product? MySQL can go away tomorrow and no one will give a flying rat's ass. Your SQL statements will still work, and all those young PHP coders will flock to competitors that suits their freetard mentality.
Maybe someone can explain to me that whole FREE mentality. Somehow, everything has to be free if you WANT it. And then what? The pattern keeps emerging that those pining for the FREE fjords fail to differentiate other people's work from theirs. Others should provide free tools, free software, free this free that. But somehow, they want to charge for the result of using said tools.
That, Gentlemen (and those high regarded few Ladies), is the problem here.
I call Monty in reference to a Family Guy episode: HE IS A BIG FAT PHONY
_______________________________
Oracle actually wants it, and it's worth 10-100x what Monty could personally afford.
you had me at #!
.... is the preposterous idea that Sun and/or Oracle care a whit about online petitions or email campaigns.
Unless Monty is just indulging in a popularity survey. In which case he forgot to ask us how we 'felt' about this.
I, BTW, feel like you've gotten your money and want your cake back as well. Good luck. Fork it and compete with your previous employer, ok?
sheesh.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
i find his political bid to try and get it back rather greedy.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
He definitely learned some new tricks so it seems. On my company e-mail address I got the following e-mail, and I can assure you that I did not apply to be kept informed about MySQL on their website. Maybe a post on a mailinglist or two, but thats it. Nevertheless, I received the following e-mail:
Hi!
I am contacting you because you have in the past shown interest in
MySQL and from that I assume you are interested in the future
well-being of MySQL.
Now you have a unique opportunity to make a difference. By signing
the petition at http://www.helpmysql.org/ you can help affect the
future of MySQL as an Open Source database.
You can find more information of this on my latest blog post at:
http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html
Help us spread the world about this petition!
http://www.helpmysql.org/ is available in 18 languages and every vote
is important, independent of from where in the world it comes!
If you know people that are using MySQL, please contact them and
ensure they also sign the petition!
Regards,
Monty
Creator of MySQL
PS: If you already have signed the petition or know about it, sorry for
reminding you about this! Because of the importance of this issue,
I am trying to contact every person that I have ever communicated
with regarding MySQL.
One has to wonder...
Because I do care about MySQL but don't care for this petition I visited the website, read his blog (the least you can do is hear someone out) and wrote a somewhat cynical but polite comment how I felt about this action. Surprise; surprise; it never appeared on the (moderated) blog responses. And thats where I have to wonder if he's doing his best for a decent and honest attempt to help MySQL or if he's working out an hidden agenda...
I for one don't think this is doing the good reputation of MySQL any good.
I'm sorry, but Monty sold his baby, and got well paid for it. If I could sell any program I wrote for a fraction of what he sold MySQL for, and they kicked me out of working on it, I could do any number of any other things I wanted to work on in life. Come on Monty, attack P=NP. It's not like you need a job.
This is my sig.
In the event of Oracle funny business. What stops anyone from starting a new project, let's pretend it is called "FreeSQL" to avoid trademark issues. Which continues to enhance and releases the current version of MySQL, which is already open source. You can't undo open source of versions already released, the license has no provisions to do so.
If there are patent issues then I guess that teaches all a lesson about bothering to file "defensive patents", unless they are assigned to some organization that cannot be easily sold or liquidated(FSF perhaps?). And simply publishing the patent information without filing is sufficient to block the creation of patent in that specific event, but not useful in a "defensive" patent trade. Of course defense of patents can be handled through copyright strong arming, for example an open source license that has a poison pill for patent litigation. Such a license might be worth considering for future projects, Ms-RL comes to mind as an example.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
If Oracle cuts MySQL loose, does Monty have to give back the billion dollars?
And fork you too, Monty/Sun/Oracle.
It may not be as fast as MySQL, but it's certainly more robust and capable. If you look at the core of ORACLE's design (which is pretty damned good), you'll find that Postgresql has similar design principals.
When it comes to data loss, I'd rather the more robust database than the fastest one.
*** Don't be dull.***
It's like you broke up with your car and then go crying it back when it has found a new owner, while you're having no luck finding another car.
It's like you broke up with your parents and then go crying back when they have found a new tenant, while you're having no luck finding another basement.
Infuriate left and right
In his blog he calls upon the MySQL users to "Help keep the Internet free" by signing his petition.
Internet Freedom has nothing to do with MySQL.
And really, given the past treatment - why bother with MySQL? Other choices exist.
1. MySQL would need to be a sufficiently revenue-producing entity in order for it to sustain internal development at Oracle. What those revenue producing metrics are is impossible to know from the outside. I'm a pessimist though and would estimate whatever MySQL dev is done in-house will probably get chopped by 2/3 in order to make the revenue fit into their financing targets. That's assuming Oracle doesn't abandon it right away.
2. This $1 Billion number being thrown around is a PR number. I'd guess Monty's gotten 10's of thousands of dollars for closing the deal. Other than that his payout won't come. He won't get paid because the value of the deal is typically based on payouts based on future earnings. We know Sun couldn't turn it into a bigger revenue producer. With the change in ownership, I'm sure Oracle will renege on whatever deal he had with Sun and tell Monty to "Go pound sand. Your issue is with the Sun Officers who signed the deal, not Oracle."
3. I bet he's got a non-compete that prevents him from directly starting something. Which, Oracle would enforce while pretending about other parts of the agreement. That's why he's got this petition thing.
Monty pretended those future payouts would work, got screwed by Sun, and now he's trying to get back in the game.
Today's entrepreneurial lesson: get paid today, not tomorrow.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
Oracle has owned Berkley DB and Sleepycat since February 2006 and it is still in fine shape. Still open source and still used the same as it ever was. I suspect that MySQL will be the same.
to collect his filthy lucre. I mean it, I really I do. I as as much a fan of FOOS as anyone and I cheer those who work their asses off to make it possible, but this guy is nothing but a greedy schmuck.
CmdrTaco this is nothing but a blatant RGA © 2010 (Revenue Generating Article) and you are an asshat for even posting it. Yes you may have started /. but now you are abusing it.
Monty, take your money and go have a great big mug of shut the fuck up you disingenuous little weasel.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Killing MySQL is not what we should be concerned about. Oracle taking control of MySQL's direction is a far greater danger. It will be harder to build a new community around a fork if MySQL still exists. If Oracle kills MySQL, a new fork will appear overnight and people will flock to it. If they keep MySQL around and do everything in their power to control it, Oracle can virtually ensure that MySQL never becomes a real threat to its proprietary database. My guess is that Oracle will keep MySQL but they will position it as a lightweight database server for small to mid-size databases. They'll push people toward their proprietary database for a "REAL" enterprise database.
then you shouldn't have sold it to Sun in the first place, dumb-ass. This sets a bad precedent - get some company to buy you open source product for a tidy sum of money, and then back-pedal and start a petition to have it return to open-source.
He sells his joke of a database product to Sun, and now he wants Mommy Government to hurt two large companies and millions of their customers, employees, and investors just to push for some socialist political agenda! Hasn't he ever heard of forking?! Viral license or not, Oracle and Sun are not Monty's slaves!
Them GNU idiots are a cult, and rational people are right to stay as far away from them as possible. Good thing even before I knew anything about software licenses I was smart enough to specialize in PostgreSQL and SQLite based on their technological merits, which make MySQL look like a toy for retarded toddlers! Why anyone would use MySQL over PostgreSQL is beyond me - must be further evidence of the socialist bias in the open source community...
If the Sun-Oracle deal goes through, I swear, I will rewrite every piece of software myself from scratch rather than resort to using anything with a copyleft license ever again!
Personally, I feel the most reasonable interpretation (from the standpoint of being consistent and, well, logical) would be that linking does *not* create a derivative work (for example, is Firefox a derivative of the Flash plugin, or Flash plugin a derivative of Firefox? Seems to me they are fairly independent works that use the mechanism of dynamic linking to work together.)
No one claims that Firefox is a derivative of Flash, or vice versa. What is claimed is that the resulting memory space with both objects loaded is a derivative work of each, which can only be created with the license-granted consent of the copyright holders of both objects. The trick: how strong is this argument since it applies only to the ephemeral address space created at runtime by the user and not, say, by Mozilla or Adobe?
In the obvious case of MegaCo distributes foo that always links dynamically to libgpled.so, one can argue that MegaCo is effectively creating that combined object because there is no other way that their software could be used. But IANAL, of course, and I think the real lawyers (and judges) haven't fully settled the question.
IPv4 exhaustion, various university pet projects seeking disruptive replacement of the Internet in a bid to hoard attention and I sold out MySQL please shed copious tears for me.
Is this the matrix did the same cat just run by twice?
If he wants it back, why can't he just give the money back that he sold it for? That seems simple enough.
The world is how you make it
Say what you want about his potential greed, MariaDB and looking for a business angle, etc. IMO, it is possible that the $1,000,000,000 (or whatever he actually pocketed) isn't as satisfying to him now that he sees his life's work being flushed down the toilet by Sun's sale to Oracle. You have to consider that maybe, just maybe, this isn't all about money to him.
Stop your whining.
That is all.
Isn't more like you sold your girlfriend to another guy and he sold her to another guy and you want people to sign a petition to free here from guy #2?
"Basically Monty fell into the classic pitfall technical people with great ideas fall into."
I'm not sure if MySQL qualifies as a "great idea", but how clueless do you have to be to not understand the VCs are in it for the money?
Do people actually sign contracts covering their dream project without reading them or consulting a lawyer?
If I could query Google for shared hosting providers that offer PostgreSQL ORDER BY price, or shared hosting providers that offer PostgreSQL ORDER BY review score, I'd agree with you. But Google just isn't that advanced yet; one has to spend time looking for reviews of each provider one at a time. Having people with experience in the area narrow down the list of decent hosting providers saves everyone's time.
Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
n/t
you had me at #!
Strict mode is a server setting passed on either the command-line while starting mysqld (you know, the server daemon) or in its configuration file in the [mysqld] section, and only super-users (users with the SUPER privilege) can change it at run time.
Hell, the page you linked to is titled "Server SQL Modes", which should have been a big clue that you were wrong.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Is anyone conducting something to counter Monty's money-grabbing schemes. A counter-petition (in particular, one that got more signatures) that said "We FOSS developers oppose efforts (by Monty) to weaken or violate the protections of the GPL, and insist that MySQL code base remain free, and not be proprietarized by its former developers". Wording could be better, but something to that effect.
I would sign in a second, and I suspect thousands of /. readers would too.
Buy Text Processing in Python
Just let it die. then we can all move to pgsql
I still agree with the GP, The only thing that this sell could take away, is the right to use the name "MySQL." And possibly any updates that the new owners add to MySQL. IE we have the code in a GPL license, we can always build from that, we just have to choose a different name if oracle declares their branch of MySQL is no longer open-source. And also Oracle would become the only one capable of creating new MySQL pre-priority licenses of MySQL.
Title says it all...
I've suggested this before. Build PostgreSQL and package it with some tweaked configurations, enable all local connections by default, beef up the buffers and some of the memory usage by default, write some install scripts to make accounts for local users, add PLSQL out of the box... I can't help but think that that's like 80% of the problem the Postgresql holdouts have, you do have to do more lifting to get it running. Maybe start writing a Postgresql configuration GUI that will help you tune the config stuff some.
If you want to be fancy include one of the replication packages out of the box too.
Call it "MyPgSQL..."
I'll think about signing his petition if he makes a legally binding pledge that the new product will be fully GPL3.
Mind you, I still wouldn't expect the petition to get anywhere unless he also gave back the money, but it wouldn't hurt to ask for what I want. I just don't see any advantage in him owning things rather than Sun or Oracle.
N.B.: Oracle is not well known as a friend to FOSS, in fact it's often a sponge on FOSS. But it's sure a lot better than an enemy.
P.S.: Based on what I've heard, the thing to REALLY ask for is that the MySql documentation be made Creative Commons licensed. Who know, Oracle might just go for it.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I am not out to buy MySQL, so I can't change the license. It's up to the new owner of MySQL to decide upon the license.
The petition is about giving control to the MySQL users of the MySQL destiny. I have nothing to gain financially if MySQL is sold to someone else. My gain would only be that MySQL would have a much better chance to be available and developed under Open Source also in the future.
is the GPL and dual-license. When MySQL was LGPL, nobody had a problem with it. But then came greediness, the switch to GPL and the MySQL-AB demands for people to pay for just linking to the MySQL client (to date there's still no concensus on whether linking to the client is a GPL violation or not, but scaring small businesses into paying is really profitable).
Frankly, I don't give a dime if Monty goes to jail, loses all his money or what not. What's really important is the ability for small businesses to use MySQL. With the Oracle-Sun deal, I really don't know what will happen.
If we wanted to fork we'd have to use the 4.0 base which was LGPL. Any volunteers to re-fix who-knows-how-many bugs?
I might give a damn if the product was worth a damn.
The SQL dialects are different enough to make the switch quite a lot of effort. Only applications designed for SQL portability from the beginning (a non trivial goal) would be the exceptions.
you had me at #!
You don't need petitions to get water to run downhill.
you had me at #!
There might have been a *joke* in this thread somewhere. :)
you had me at #!
If someone gave me a billion dollars, I would spend 90% of it building an orbital laser to blow up the moon.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
We have changed the release model so that instead of focusing on quality and features our release is now defined by timeliness and features. Quality is not regarded to be that important. To quote Mårten Mickos: "MySQL 5.1 will be release as GA in or before December because I say so". Mårten's reasons for this is that he needs something he can sell and a release marked "GA" is much easier to sell than a release marked "RC".
The MySQL server team have a bug fixing policy where a bug that has existed a long time has a lower priority 'because people know about them'. This is supposedly one of the reasons why the Bug#989 mentioned above has not been fixed.
The very first post is WTF-inspiring:
knielsen said...
Great post, Monty. Thanks for taking the time to write this, and thanks for still fighting for MySQL quality. Keep up the spirit!
And another WTF post a little further down:
Mark Callaghan said...
MySQL Cluster _is_ carrier grade.
- T
How are any other licenses any worse? With BSD, you're under similar restrictions. With closed source, you're screwed. GPL allows you to fork the project as needed.
When you link to a library, your compiled code must include the library's symbol names, which are supposedly covered by the copyright. Symbol names include function names from the library, and are necessary for the dynamic linker to work. The LGPL makes an exception for symbol names, so closed source can link against it. MySQL switched from LGPL to GPL specifically to try to make more money via a dual license. Whether or not this is enforceable is another story.
When I think about "what comes (immediately) after MySQL," it really does look a lot like Drizzle.
you had me at #!
And it could be abbreviated MSSQL
Only if it gets improved to understand more Transact-SQL, such as the more flexible version of DATEDIFF that Microsoft SQL Server Express implements. (Having to integrate three systems that use MySQL, MSSQL, and SQLite is fun.)
even though the library or exe *depends* upon the other work, it may not be a derivative because it does not *contain* the other work
If the API's header contains an inline function or a C++ template, then this function or template instantiation gets copied into programs using the header. Is that a derivative?
What if Oracle figured there is a huge market out there which will never,ever use their products over MySQL because of their expensive, closed brand image and they will be happy to sell official MySQL support contracts to larger companies.
I mean, God forbid, what if there is no conspiracy at all?
Just 2-3 months ago, there was also a great conspiracy to kill Java, the company who relies their own damn products to that virtual machine purchased Sun to kill Java. Yea, right... Or, the evil plan to kill Open Office. Their only product in hand which competes directly and severely hurts Microsoft, the number 1 software house.
Also, did someone check the size of Oracle, they are second largest software company on planet. If we subtract OS Business, they can easily hit number 1.
A company sized as Oracle and has no "lets ship everything for our own windows" childish ideological obligations could really kill MySQL from "there", without paying billions. How? In couple of months, they could release some really working, perfectly solid, polished UI with dozens of Wizards "Oracle SQL Lite" for all operating systems with free support. Want to bet which solution would large companies, hosting providers would choose?
Remember, it is 2010 now, Open Office exists and yet we still speak about MS Office.
I hope you have read this old exchange between RMS and Bruno Haible on whether CLISP had to be released under GPL if it was written to link to Readline.
At one point, Bruno Haible asks whether he could avoid releasing CLISP under GPL by bundling it with a libnoreadline that he would write, which duplicated the interface of libreadline but offered none of the functionality. The end user compiling the program would the link it to the real Readline. This is the response RMS gave him:
The way I read this is that the technical details of dynamic vs. static linking are just not decisive. The key questions come down to a judge's judgement call whether the part under dispute "incorporates" the GPL'ed work, and that the set of arguments that can be made in one direction or another is actually somewhat open-ended. So, for example, I bet you that if I wrote a debugger-like tool that allowed me to dynamically link into arbitrary libraries at runtime, inspect their symbol tables and call into their functions, nobody could make me release it under GPL if I distributed it together with a GPL-licensed library that was in no way needed for my program to work.
The converse of this is that there are GPL licensors that take the position that some uses, despite not involving any linking at all, create a derivative of their own GPL licensed work. IIRC MySQL AB took this position with regard to client applications that used the GPL-licensed version of MySQL, even if the client applications did not link any MySQL-provided client libraries. In RMS's terms, these applications would "clearly show the intention for incorporation of" the MySQL server, by being written to rely on features unique to MySQL (e.g., by using MySQL-specific syntax or commands), or by virtue of only working if used with a MySQL server.
As to why GPL Firefox can link to proprietary Flash, I'd suggest that a key reason why this is so is because no copyright holder that would have standing actually objects to it. Courts in the USA for the most part are only allowed to rule on actual disputes, and clearly it seems like none of the potential parties here have any dispute.
Are you adequate?
Did you read this comment: http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/02/time-to-move-on.html?showComment=1233908220000#c6913688673838779641 I think the biggest problem was the business model of MySQL, which was based on support. And companies like Red Hat was supporting MySQL in it's RHEL, and they as a result did not use MySQL's support services. Thus MySQL had to make some features non-free. What is even worse, it looks like it was funded with VC, which means that either it had to IPO or sold to another company, according to this article: http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/01/sun-buys-mysql-ab.html I wonder what if Monty had chosen an IPO instead of selling it to another company? Seems that Monty was the CTO of MySQL AB, BTW.
Actually, if Oracle was forced to release mysql for free under a BSD-like style license, you'd benefit directly - you still have some goodwill from having developed previous versions, and your current work is quite similar.
So, excuse me, but it doesn't look like you care only about mysql about users; actually it looks like you're caring mostly about yourself.
Besides, mysql isn't so good or irreplaceable that the internet will die off without it. Sorry if you think otherwise, but maybe you should look away from the mirror from time to time.
Cheers,
it's not "really" the death of "free internet" or open source software.
you are right. as a freelance web developer, this don't mean much for me, if i develop right now something that use MySQL, that won't be a problem, cause the server will probably run the current free MySQL version.
if worst will happen, and i won't be able to use an updated version of MySQL for free, i will just use PostgreSQL for new applications. my main development framework (CakePHP) has no problem with that.
and MySQL will be forked anyway at need. what reminds me, didn't he (or someone) already forked it with some strange name?
so from my point of view Oracle can go **** themselves, i just feel sorry for the big Companies, so i signed it of course.
They managed to sell while keeping critical parts to themselves. In MySQL's case, that ship sailed when Sun bought it.
you had me at #!