Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MariaDB Fixes Business Source License, Releases MaxScale 2.1 (perens.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the two-heads-are-better-than-one dept.

Creator of The Open Source Definition and longtime Slashdot reader Bruce Perens writes: MariaDB is releasing MaxScale 2.1, a new version of their database routing proxy, and has modified its timed-transition-to-Open-Source "Business Source License" to make it more acceptable to the Open Source community and more easily usable by other companies. I've blogged the issues I had with the license and how MariaDB has fixed them, and Kaj Arno has blogged the MariaDB side of the story. Here's an excerpt from Perens' blog post: "The BSL is a parameterized license. The licensor chooses the license which is transitioned to, the date of the transition, and the limitation. The problem with this is that it was so parameterized that if you told someone the license was 'BSL 1.0,' they would not have any idea what license they really had. It might transition to any of 100 Open Source licenses, or to a non-Open-Source license. The transition might happen in a month, or next century. The limitation might be that you could only have three commercial servers, or that you indentured your firstborn son (OK, that's going overboard, but you get the picture)." He continues, "So, I didn't like that 'BSL' didn't really say what the license did, and I didn't feel that was the best thing for the users or the community. I asked MariaDB to fix it. Together we have arrived at constraints on the parameters and minimum privileges that will take the new BSL much closer to being one license while still allowing licensors some latitude to choose parameters."

17 comments

  1. Frosty by Hognoxious · · Score: 0

    Got a frosty psit because I don't use joins and I wwrite to /dev/null!

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Frosty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your a doosh

  2. More Sleight of Hand... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 2

    ..to try to obscure the the fact that they don't actually *own* the source to MySQL, and never will. Any changes or additions they make make to it still have to be (a) made available under GPL and (b) given back to Oracle.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    1. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by hholzgra · · Score: 2

      This is not about MySQL or MariaDB (the product) source code though. This is about the MaxScale proxy which is a totally different product. It used the original MySQL SQL parser in its 1.x release, which is still released under the GPL. MaxScale 2.0, which is BSL-Licensed, no longer contains any MySQL code any more.

      Any changes made to the actual server product will continue to be under GPL for the reason you've given. Nothing needs ot be given back to Oracle though. The changes are obviously available to Oracle to integrate into MySQL Community Server, but Oracle can't simply integrate them in the commercially licensed version ...

    2. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So MaxScale 2.0 is not freely available for use then?

      Probably safer to stick with Percona's ProxySQL https://github.com/sysown/proxysql

      Seems like the BS in BSL isn't business source.

    3. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      You are of course welcome to use whatever you want, as long as you comply with the license. In the case of ProxySQL, that's the GPL. Percona appears to be one person, one René Cannaò, and it looks like he's interested in selling his consulting services. If you are actually making money from using his product, please consider throwing some work his way.

      Like I said, Open Source developers should not have to wear hair shirts while their users, sometimes the most profitable companies on Wall Street, rake in the dough.

      Bruce

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    4. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 2

      Gee. Monty and his previous company did write an entire SQL database engine and put it under the GPL back when Ingres wasn't in great shape for us to use. They didn't sell it to Oracle, either. And with his present company, Monty continues to maintain it. They deserve some credit for that.

      --
      Bruce Perens.
    5. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does it matter if they sold it to Sun, Oracle or any another company? MySQL is still available for free and licensed with GPL just as it ever was with MySQL AB. To monetize it, it's possible to license it from Oracle in a non-GPL edition just as it was from MySQL AB for embedding customers. In addition, there are some closed source commercial extensions in the commercial MySQL edition that work as plugins, meaning anyone can recreate those plugins for the GPL MySQL edition and claim it's "Enterprise". MariaDB has created some plugins and so has Percona, bless them both. MariaDB develops the GPL database server and merges some of the continuing development from MySQL as well. Yes, MySQL development continues under Oracle at higher speed than ever before (presumably more $$ in R&D).

      The software that MariaDB is not forced to make GPL, they close source with BSL (at least MaxScale). Because BSL *is* a closed source license. It's the same thing as Windows 10 being closed-source even if it came with the source code of Windows 8. It is useless except to fork or maintain an old version. You cannot fix the software that you currently run.

      The only true guaranteed open source MySQL-based solution in active development is from Percona. Backup, monitor, various plugins, proxy (ProxySQL), and database server are all open source. If you have a problem with any component, you can go in the code and fix it. With MariaDB, you can't, at least with anything licensed with BSL.

      Just because MariaDB chose a broken business model, ie. forking a GPL software and hoping to generate big bucks from it, it doesn't make BSL any more open source nor necessary. They could have just done like Percona but in addition capitalize on Monty's fame in the community. Or, they could have spent their resources in building things peripheral to MySQL like MaxScale, closed source or not, that are badly needed to make MySQL a more "complete" solution and make MySQL even more widespread. In other words, they could have taken a slice from a bigger pie instead of trying to create two smaller pies while the world moves towards NoSQL and other databases.

    6. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Percona is a company of perhaps similar size as MariaDB. Percona takes MySQL (from Oracle) and tweaks it here and there because they can, ie. because it's licensed with GPL even under Oracle. Percona also puts together various other open source components, a lot of which they create, to build the Percona flavor of MySQL, which is similar to the commercial MySQL edition from Oracle. Btw, this includes ProxySQL, by the person you mentioned, because it's open source and very good. So, Percona and ProxySQL two entirely different entities that go well together.

      Nobody has to pay anything for Percona software (or ProxySQL) as it is 100% GPL, but people can pay for support if they feel the need or if they see the value. It seems the most idealistic way to monetize open source software! Oracle appears to monetize with the "open core" model, which at least I think is pretty normal. I think MongoDB does the same thing. As a side and unrelated note, Percona also has an "enhanced" GPL version of MongoDB..

      MariaDB does great development in their version of MySQL, no doubt! They also take/merge? big parts from Oracle (MySQL server), from Percona (online backup utility), and from Codership (Galera Cluster).

      > Like I said, Open Source developers should not have to wear hair shirts while their users, sometimes the most profitable companies on Wall Street, rake in the dough.

      How about taking other people's GPL software while backed by VC money, presumably for some kind of "exit", and making sure that these other people cannot take your software because it's proprietary?

      Not sure how much money goes "upstream"... And not sure how much new development of MariaDB really comes directly from MariaDB... Certainly it's a lot but in terms of %, there could be a surprise.

      Despite all this, I can also sing the praises of MariaDB because I see the great value in competition and because what MariaDB does is perfectly in tune with the GPL and that brings so many benefits like innovation. But, I honestly think maybe you've been a bit hoodwinked into putting your good name on the BSL, to be used for marketing...

    7. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by hholzgra · · Score: 1

      "You cannot fix the software that you currently run." ... but you can. You get the source. BSL is about usage restrictions, not about not getting the source.

      I agree that it is not a true open source license (I'd call it "Eventually Open Source").

      But it is not a closed source license either.

      It's restrictions are about using the binaries produced from the source, not about seeing or touching the source itself. If you have permission to run it you also automatically have permission to modify and fix it in any way you want.

      I won't say that I'm a big fan of the idea either, but we should at least stay with the facts ...

    8. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's say you have 4 servers. You make a change using the BSL source code from GitHub. Then, you can only use 3 servers.

      If you buy the product MariaDB Enterprise, does it come with a right that you can compile the MaxScale source code from GitHub, which contains the restriction in LICENSE.TXT, without restriction or does it come with a separate source code with a permissive LICENSE.TXT?

      It may seem like splitting hairs but I think open source software is a bit about that. Just like people could also copy GPL code into their proprietary software or distribute software that contains BSD code but does not include the credits if we don't care about these things.

    9. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by ranton · · Score: 1

      It used the original MySQL SQL parser in its 1.x release, which is still released under the GPL. MaxScale 2.0, which is BSL-Licensed, no longer contains any MySQL code any more.

      I don't understand why any company would use parts of the MySQL code base when the PostgreSQL code base has a far more open license. Just use the Postgre SQL parser instead. Maybe I'm confused about the Postgre license but it seems like a pretty easy choice, and the one I would make if I was developing a new open source or even commercial database (in the 1.0 release anyway).

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    10. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by hholzgra · · Score: 1

      If you buy the product from MariaDB then you are not using it for free, so the usage limitation "Usage of the software is free when your application uses the Software with a total of less than three database server instances for production purposes." doesn't apply to you.

      So no different LICENSE.TXT needed. You can use your modified version internally up to the number of instances you've licensed, you can also publish modified source ("fork it on github"), but others who use your fork are still bound to "total of less than three database server instances" unless they also have a license agreement with MariaDB Corp.

      IANAL, but I think that basically has it covered. Any license agreement with MariaDB Corp. is an extension to the LICENSE.TXT conditions, not a replacement in my point of view. But again: IANAL

    11. Re:More Sleight of Hand... by cas2000 · · Score: 1

      BSL seems like more of the same to me.

      Monty has had a habit of playing silly buggers with the GPL (and FOSS licensing in general) right from the earliest days of MySQL - he wanted the PR and code-contribution benefits of the GPL but liked to deceive people that, even though mysql was GPL, a commercial license was required if the software was used for commercial purposes. This lie was pushed for many years on the official mysql web site, in documentation and other support material, and by mysql employees on forums and mailing lists.

      On second thoughts, BSL isn't just more of the same. It's worse than that. BSL isn't a Free Software license covered with lies to confuse people, to trick them that it isn't actually Free Source, that they don't have the rights granted to them by the license. It's a non-open license with lies to pretend that it is open.

      I'm as amused as anyone that Monty scammed $1B out of Sun/Oracle and then went on to build another company based around the exact same software he sold to them. But that doesn't make him a nice or even likeable person, or ethical, reputable, or trustworthy...or anything else but a scammer. Just another self-serving businessman.

  3. In other words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BSL is Shared Source, which was heavily ridiculed here when MS introduced it 15 years ago as "you can look but you can't touch". You can't even deploy it on more than three servers without paying MariaDB license fees.

    Ah yes, but there's a "revert to GPL in three years" provision. But that only applies to the version that shipped three years before the reversion date, i.e. a commercially obsolete release. Better than nothing, but hardly impressive.

    1. Re:In other words by hholzgra · · Score: 1

      But you *can* touch:

      "Subject to the Use Limitation, Licensor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide (subject to applicable laws) license to copy, modify, display, use, create derivative works, and redistribute the Software until the Change Date."

      See? "modify" and "create derivated works" is especially allowed.

      On the other hand the "free ride" usage condition is actually "less than three database servers", so your "can't even deploy it on more than three servers" is not correct, it actually is "no more than two".

  4. bad mysql license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2/16/17. The original mysql had dodgy licensing (owenlabs.org/rant.htm#badsql) and I'm not surprised the same guy's doing the same thing with his "free" version. Just stay away from it and use something else.