Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MySQL 3.20.32a Released Under GPL

Posted by Roblimo on from the step-in-the-right-direction dept.

Rolan writes "It seems that MySQL has been released under the GPL. Though I can't find any stories on it, you can see the 'news' here." We're posting this because lots of people have sent it in, but don't get too excited about it, okay? According to this Linux Today piece sent in by bradsjm, only one older version of MySQL is being released under GPL. A good start, and worthy of applause, but not that big a deal in the overall scheme of things.

8 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Licensing question by HoserHead · · Score: 3
    To understand how the GPL works, you must first understand how copyright works. As the owner of the copyright for a given piece of software, you can legally say exactly what the licensing terms are, and for whom. As an example, you can give it a license something like the following:

    LICENSE FOR FOO PRODUCT

    If your name is Bill, you may use Foo Product under the terms of the BSD License.

    If your name is Joe, you may use Foo Product under the terms of the GPL.

    In any other cases, the licensing terms for this product are dictated by the QPL.

    Given, of course, that you define what the BSD License, the GPL, and QPL are, that is probably a valid license. Also, you can go ahead and release it to your friend Sue under a completely different license, and you don't have to tell anyone about it.

    And then, 6 months later, you decide that Foo Product's licensing terms were a bit too restrictive, and you want Joe /and/ Bill to have rights to it under the BSD License, and everyone else to have it under the GPL. You can do that. The previous license still stands, though - so those people who got it under the rights of the previous license still have those rights.

    And then, of course, you have to follow the terms of the license. In this case, Monty's releasing an old, unsupported version of MySQL under the GPL. This doesn't negate the fact it was under a non-Free license before, and it doesn't change the licensing to anything else. However, anything you do with this new GPL-licensed MySQL must be done under the terms of the GPL. Later on, Monty can change the license again, and you don't gain any more, nor do you lose, rights to it than you had under the GPL. Unless some sort of termination clause or other such thing is built right into the license, a piece of software is licensed as it is forever.

  2. Granted, but... by mikemcc · · Score: 3

    Although I don't have any hard data to either confirm or deny your statement, I will accept as fact that Postgres has better performance on really large databases.

    To me that's not a relevant selling point, while MySQL's speed is. I'm using PHP and MySQL to automate my company's intranet - content management, remote publishing, workflow, that sort of thing. The quantity of data that needs to reside in a database is relatively modest, so Postgres' superior performance at the high end is a benefit that I will never see. Our "Current Clients" or "Job Openings" databases just aren't going to get so big that MySQL strains under the load.

    >But for real databases of actual size...

    These are real databases, because they are storing real corporate information, reducing duplication of data, improving consistency, and generally making my fellow employees' work days better. Their actual size is very modest - much smaller than their actual benefit. Different tasks require different tools.

    MySQL's speed does represent an immediate benefit to me, and to my users. Also, because I'm automating workflow, rather than handling financial transactions, I don't miss the features like commits or rollbacks that MySQL leaves out (specifically to increase the db's speed).

    But the real "killer app" for me is the web-based interface to MySQL, phpMyAdmin. This is a truly wonderful utility which has saved me tons of development time. The basic interface permits me to administer MySQL from my browser, and I can crank out customized interfaces on very short notice, just by copying the php scripts to a new directory and commenting out the HTML that produces functions that I don't want to offer to the user. In a relatively "high trust" environment like the company's intranet, MySQL, PHP, and phpMyAdmin have made my job MUCH easier.

    FYI, the makers of phpMyAdmin now have a postgresMyAdmin , too, although I've been so happy with MySQL that I don't feel compelled to change.

  3. The GPL explained. by mrsam · · Score: 3

    The copyright holder, the owner of the source code, can use whatever license he/she wants at any time. Now, if someone ELSE takes the source code, they are the ones who have obligations under the GPL.

    The GPL specifies the rights and obligations granted to you from someone else. Unless that someone else also received the GPLed source code, they have no GPL-related obligations whatsoever.
    --

  4. Re:I just have to know... by Hobbex · · Score: 3


    Actually, that isn't such a bad idea. If there was a script that sent a "first post" message, then at least the wouldn't get pleasure (???) of doing it. And the script could generate the messages at -1 automatically so we wouldn't have to see them.

    Maybe the lamers would just go bother some other site...

    -
    /. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.

  5. Re:Current licensing scheme? by Scola · · Score: 3

    See: http://www.mysql.com/Manual_chapter/manual_Licensi ng_and_Support.html Basically, if you are selling MySQL on CD, charging to intall it, or putting it in a non-redistrubitable distribution they want a cut. The client is already GPLed.

  6. Re:Umm, so is it still a toy? (corrected) by Jonas+�berg · · Score: 3
    I've had first hand experience on the differences between PostgreSQL and MySQL. Some time ago, I was asked to take over maintanance of a web application (e-commerce system) that was using MySQL as the RDBM. This database layout hasn't to my knowledge had any real problems, but when I was asked to build another, similar system, for another client, I was faced with the choice between MySQL and PostgreSQL. This time, I sat down and read through some more advanced SQL features. Let's face it; almost everyone can learn basic SQL rather quickly, but most of us (myself included at that point) just never bother with the more advanced features. Sometimes we even make databases using SQL that could just as well have been GDBM's.


    So what I discovered was that PostgreSQL had a lot of advanced features, and when I saw from examples how these could be used, there was no question about that I should use PostgreSQL instead. I used to love MySQL, and I still do as a quick web-application database, but whenever I make a more serious system these days, I tend to use PostgreSQL because the features it provides allows me to construct a database layout that is superior than that which can be made with MySQL.

  7. Re:Umm, so is it still a toy? (corrected) by Gleef · · Score: 3

    Yeah, by those measures it's still a toy. But as a toy it's still powerful enough for little web-backend databases, which it seems to work very well for.

    A Honda Civic is a toy, if your standard is a Tractor-Trailer rig. That doesn't make it less useful for the people who only need to run to the store for groceries. I'm glad to see more choices available in Free database servers, even "toys".

    ----

    --

    ----
    Open mind, insert foot.
  8. Licensing question by stevef · · Score: 3

    So if they release verion 3.20.32a under the GPL, by the nature of the GPL doesn't that mean that all successive versions are also covered by the GPL?

    I ask this beacuse the article is very specific about a particular version of MySQL.

    Yeah, I know it's a nitpick, but I'm not trying to look a gift-culture in the mouth. I just want to make sure I understand how the GPL works.

    Steve