The chance of the GPL changing from a walled garden which blocks non-Borg compatibility with almost all open source licenses seems minimal, unfortunately.
However, for internal corporate use this is irrelevant. You already can use GPL software freely within a corporation since that doesn't count as distribution. The FSF FAQ make the view of the FSF on this clear:
'Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company "distribution"?
No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders. However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals, that is distribution. In particular, providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution.'
It's perhaps more of a reason to use a database server like MySQL which has lots of storage engines and can develop or integrate more as necessary to deal with such business changes. No reason to write to only MySQL either.
One other MySQL advantage: millions of downloads and lots of places like Wikipedia and Sabre and Yahoo and Google using it in world-beating products with massive loads.
So fork BDB - that's your right for open source software.:) If this bothers people, that's what will happen. The right to fork is a significant guarantee of long-term availability.
At present there are more than twenty storage engines for MySQL, though most aren't distributed by MySQL itself. Quite a few significant users of MySQL have their own engines for special purposes as well.
Multiple concurrent articles for depth of coverage would be very interesting. One of the ongoing conflicts is the different depth of coverage which people want on subjects, with those knowing little about a subject wanting shallow articles while those who alreay know something about it want more depth.
What does the Wikimedia Foundation own that Google could usefully buy?:) It doesn't own the content; like everyone else, it has a GFDL license to use it. That's one of the key protections for the content in fact - the GFDL prevents it from just being sold then locked up by trademarks or DRM.
Google paying salaries for people with no obligations to Google would be interesting - I as one of the developers and DBA had to take a job and cut back my Wikipedia involvement or go bust and barely avoided that as it was.
The Wikimedia Foundation already has a premium service being provided to companies which pay a fee for a feed of changed articles.
Jimbo has recently advocated some forms of ads, like a new link to a wiki page of related services, with a paid higher placement on that page for the company which first asked for that feed to be made available.
The Foundation has registered a trademark for "Wikipedia", which appears to directly contradict its obligations under the GFDL license it is granted by the copyright owners of Wikipedia. There's talk of the Foundation possibly requiring a fee from anyone who publishes anything with the title Wikipedia. This is very different from the discussions prior to it getting that registration, which were about stopping abuse like fake domains, not about raising money for the Foundation.
So, it's probably fair to say at this point that the author-owners of the Wikipedia encyclopedia copyrights are more committed to the objectives you list than Jimbo and the Wikimedia Foundation.
Much of this probably arises from the desire to raise money to pay for things like salaries, travel and administration as well as the ongoing costs of bandwidth and new servers to handle load increases. It's understandable that Founation officers would feel this financial pressure more than the owners of Wikipedia.
$100 a month should be buying you something closer to an average of one megabit per second continuously used for one month. If that's anything close to your typical usage you might want to consider a different plan or provider.
Rates go lower if you're in a position to choose lower quality but cheaper providers, down to $30 or less per megabit/s/month sometimes.
If someone is using "gay" and "faggot" slung around as insults in a different Guild, I'd like to see action taken against them for their inappropriate conduct.
I see creating a guild which discriminates the other way as just more discrimination and not helpful.
Yes, there are lots of unpleasant or clueless people around. Better to get them out of the game. Maybe they would learn something from it.
What I wrote was: "Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild."
Then in a different part of the post, covering a general principle, not the specifics of this: "People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation."
Suggesting that I actually wrote "Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly... discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation" was inaccurate.
I assume you were trying to suggest that a policy against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation didn't necessarily cover discriminating on the basis of views about sexual orientation. I disagree. I don't find it acceptable to use words like "gay" or "faggot" as insults, even if the person using those words honestly holds the view that those are insults. There's no place for those words as insults in that product, in my opinion. Regardless of the guild.
The guild was created with a policy of excluding some customers based on their views about sexual orientation. That's wrong.
It would also be wrong to discriminate against those with any particular sexual oriention in any other guild; this one was just far more obvious about its discriminatory policy. Discrimination is simply wrong, it doesn't matter whether it's being done by 10% of the population to the other 90% or vice-versa.
"OZ is recruiting all levels | We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'! (guilduniverse.com/oz)"
Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild.
Seems clearly contrary to a policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. As it should be, for discriminating on that basis is simply wrong. Whichever way that discrimination is going. People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation.
If you aren't redistributing the python code, you don't need a license other than GPL for MySQL. The FLOSS exemption is for those who are distributing their applications with MySQL, not for web sites. For an example reply from MySQL saying so, see Licence for MySQL use at website?.
Is it really fair to call Wikipedia, Yahoo and Google the smallest and most simplistic of database driven web sites? They are all in the top 20 sites in the world with MySQL as a mission-critical database server behind their database-driven sites. It's a little hard to get any bigger than these web sites.
Wikipedia isn't particularly big, with around 400 million rows in its highest row count table and peakimg at 10-20,000 or so queries per second. That 400 million row table is typically being updated many times a second while also being queried many times a second, all inside transactions in response to live end-user requests.
The current InnoDB row counts for the master Wikipedia server, one of five in the main set, are:
Number of rows inserted 969608627, updated 173250135, deleted 798684629, read 154067949289 25.67 inserts/s, 13.67 updates/s, 8.56 deletes/s, 1600.01 reads/s
The averages are over 96 days, from when we switched this one to being master.
The *nix default database storage engine is MyISAM. If you're using Windows and tell the installer you want transactions the default is set to InnoDB. The transactional storage engines include InnoDB, Cluster and BDB. To use one of those either change the default database engine or use engine=InnoDB (or whatever) in the CREATE TABLE statement. You can convert from one to the other using ALTER TABLE ENGINE=InnoDB or whatever you want.
Also, the default transaction mode is autocommit, automatic commiting after each statement. So if you don't either start a transaction or set autocommit=0 you're going to see automatic per-statement commits.
Wikipedia.de doesn't get its data from anywhere. It has no data. All it is is an automatic link to de.wikipedia. A German court can prohibit this generic link or all links to de.wikipedia.org from anyone in Germany if it wishes to do so.
None of those things affect the dead person, who knows nothing about them. We're also talking about using the correct legal name of a person, not in any way harming them or their body.
Taking legal action and appearing in the press coverage of it just did make the parents and those supporting them limited purpose public figures for this matter, under the laws of the jurisdiction where the German language encyclopedia is hosted. To remove material related to them they would need to prove actual malice and given the news coverage that is not going to be possible, because the coverage is obviously justified by their actions.
The law of Germany may be different but that's not important for this, just for whether the German affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation loses its assets or not. Worth losing them if necessary.
Exactly right. Content can be moved, though it's not yet as easy as it should be because the full master copy is not fully and independently mirrored on equipment with different owners.
At present, no mirror has all of the author / copyright holder details like password hashes and email addresses which would be needed for a really smooth transition to different servers. These things are not part of any public database dump, for obvious security reasons.
There's no slander or libel involved. If someone is accused or arrested or on trial those are simply facts about a current event, not a comment on the character of a person who has not been found guilty of any crime.
Slashdot Mirror
The chance of the GPL changing from a walled garden which blocks non-Borg compatibility with almost all open source licenses seems minimal, unfortunately.
However, for internal corporate use this is irrelevant. You already can use GPL software freely within a corporation since that doesn't count as distribution. The FSF FAQ make the view of the FSF on this clear:
'Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company "distribution"?
No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders. However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals, that is distribution. In particular, providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution.'
It's perhaps more of a reason to use a database server like MySQL which has lots of storage engines and can develop or integrate more as necessary to deal with such business changes. No reason to write to only MySQL either.
One other MySQL advantage: millions of downloads and lots of places like Wikipedia and Sabre and Yahoo and Google using it in world-beating products with massive loads.
So fork BDB - that's your right for open source software. :) If this bothers people, that's what will happen. The right to fork is a significant guarantee of long-term availability.
At present there are more than twenty storage engines for MySQL, though most aren't distributed by MySQL itself. Quite a few significant users of MySQL have their own engines for special purposes as well.
This system has a backdoor built in which allows logging of the discussions by those not participating in them.
Secure = nobody has access to the conversation but the two people involved in it.
That sounds more like it. :)
Multiple concurrent articles for depth of coverage would be very interesting. One of the ongoing conflicts is the different depth of coverage which people want on subjects, with those knowing little about a subject wanting shallow articles while those who alreay know something about it want more depth.
What does the Wikimedia Foundation own that Google could usefully buy? :) It doesn't own the content; like everyone else, it has a GFDL license to use it. That's one of the key protections for the content in fact - the GFDL prevents it from just being sold then locked up by trademarks or DRM.
Google paying salaries for people with no obligations to Google would be interesting - I as one of the developers and DBA had to take a job and cut back my Wikipedia involvement or go bust and barely avoided that as it was.
The Wikimedia Foundation already has a premium service being provided to companies which pay a fee for a feed of changed articles.
Jimbo has recently advocated some forms of ads, like a new link to a wiki page of related services, with a paid higher placement on that page for the company which first asked for that feed to be made available.
The Foundation has registered a trademark for "Wikipedia", which appears to directly contradict its obligations under the GFDL license it is granted by the copyright owners of Wikipedia. There's talk of the Foundation possibly requiring a fee from anyone who publishes anything with the title Wikipedia. This is very different from the discussions prior to it getting that registration, which were about stopping abuse like fake domains, not about raising money for the Foundation.
So, it's probably fair to say at this point that the author-owners of the Wikipedia encyclopedia copyrights are more committed to the objectives you list than Jimbo and the Wikimedia Foundation.
Much of this probably arises from the desire to raise money to pay for things like salaries, travel and administration as well as the ongoing costs of bandwidth and new servers to handle load increases. It's understandable that Founation officers would feel this financial pressure more than the owners of Wikipedia.
$100 a month should be buying you something closer to an average of one megabit per second continuously used for one month. If that's anything close to your typical usage you might want to consider a different plan or provider.
Rates go lower if you're in a position to choose lower quality but cheaper providers, down to $30 or less per megabit/s/month sometimes.
If someone is using "gay" and "faggot" slung around as insults in a different Guild, I'd like to see action taken against them for their inappropriate conduct.
I see creating a guild which discriminates the other way as just more discrimination and not helpful.
Yes, there are lots of unpleasant or clueless people around. Better to get them out of the game. Maybe they would learn something from it.
What I wrote was: "Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild."
Then in a different part of the post, covering a general principle, not the specifics of this: "People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation."
Suggesting that I actually wrote "Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly... discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation" was inaccurate.
I assume you were trying to suggest that a policy against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation didn't necessarily cover discriminating on the basis of views about sexual orientation. I disagree. I don't find it acceptable to use words like "gay" or "faggot" as insults, even if the person using those words honestly holds the view that those are insults. There's no place for those words as insults in that product, in my opinion. Regardless of the guild.
The guild was created with a policy of excluding some customers based on their views about sexual orientation. That's wrong.
It would also be wrong to discriminate against those with any particular sexual oriention in any other guild; this one was just far more obvious about its discriminatory policy. Discrimination is simply wrong, it doesn't matter whether it's being done by 10% of the population to the other 90% or vice-versa.
"OZ is recruiting all levels | We are not 'GLBT only,' but we are 'GLBT friendly'! (guilduniverse.com/oz)"
Seems the guild was created specifically to discriminate on the basis of being GLBT friendly, excluding other customers from membership of that guild.
Seems clearly contrary to a policy prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. As it should be, for discriminating on that basis is simply wrong. Whichever way that discrimination is going. People are and should be equally treated, without regard for their sexual orientation.
Can't tell you for DB2 but for MySQL, Wikipedia's main set of five database servers is using replication included under the free GPL license.
If you aren't redistributing the python code, you don't need a license other than GPL for MySQL. The FLOSS exemption is for those who are distributing their applications with MySQL, not for web sites. For an example reply from MySQL saying so, see Licence for MySQL use at website?.
Is it really fair to call Wikipedia, Yahoo and Google the smallest and most simplistic of database driven web sites? They are all in the top 20 sites in the world with MySQL as a mission-critical database server behind their database-driven sites. It's a little hard to get any bigger than these web sites.
Wikipedia isn't particularly big, with around 400 million rows in its highest row count table and peakimg at 10-20,000 or so queries per second. That 400 million row table is typically being updated many times a second while also being queried many times a second, all inside transactions in response to live end-user requests.
The current InnoDB row counts for the master Wikipedia server, one of five in the main set, are:
Number of rows inserted 969608627, updated 173250135, deleted 798684629, read 154067949289
25.67 inserts/s, 13.67 updates/s, 8.56 deletes/s, 1600.01 reads/s
The averages are over 96 days, from when we switched this one to being master.
Also, the default transaction mode is autocommit, automatic commiting after each statement. So if you don't either start a transaction or set autocommit=0 you're going to see automatic per-statement commits.
See Transactions in MySQL and transaction isolation levels for more.
It's been this way since before MySQL 4.0, though using "type" instead of "engine" in versions 4.0 and below.
The system seems to be working: PR inappropriately inserted gets news headline exposing it and more attention directed at the subject being concealed.
Wikipedia.de doesn't get its data from anywhere. It has no data. All it is is an automatic link to de.wikipedia. A German court can prohibit this generic link or all links to de.wikipedia.org from anyone in Germany if it wishes to do so.
He's also the employer of one of the other members of the board.
None of those things affect the dead person, who knows nothing about them. We're also talking about using the correct legal name of a person, not in any way harming them or their body.
Taking legal action and appearing in the press coverage of it just did make the parents and those supporting them limited purpose public figures for this matter, under the laws of the jurisdiction where the German language encyclopedia is hosted. To remove material related to them they would need to prove actual malice and given the news coverage that is not going to be possible, because the coverage is obviously justified by their actions.
The law of Germany may be different but that's not important for this, just for whether the German affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation loses its assets or not. Worth losing them if necessary.
Exactly right. Content can be moved, though it's not yet as easy as it should be because the full master copy is not fully and independently mirrored on equipment with different owners.
At present, no mirror has all of the author / copyright holder details like password hashes and email addresses which would be needed for a really smooth transition to different servers. These things are not part of any public database dump, for obvious security reasons.
There's no slander or libel involved. If someone is accused or arrested or on trial those are simply facts about a current event, not a comment on the character of a person who has not been found guilty of any crime.