Re: MySQL Gemini code

Hi!

As I do have some insight in these matters, I thought I would comment
on this thing

>>>>> "Jan" == Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:

Jan> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> As some of you know, Nusphere is trying to sell MySQL with an additional
>> transaction-based table manager called Gemini.  They enabled download of
>> the source code yesterday at:
>> 
>> http://mysql.org/download3.php?file_id=1118
>> 
>> Looking through the 122k lines of C code in the Gemini directory, it is
>> pretty clear from a 'grep -i progress' that the Gemini code is actually
>> the database storage code for the Progress database.  Progress is the
>> parent company of Nusphere.

Jan>     And this press release

Jan>         http://www.nusphere.com/releases/071601.htm

Jan>     also  explains why they had to do it this way. They disagreed
Jan>     with the policy that every code added to the core system must
Jan>     be  owned  by  MySQL  AB,  so that these guys can sell it for
Jan>     money in their commercial licenses.

Please note that we NEVER have asked NuSphere to sign over copyright
of Gemini to us. We do it only for the core server, and this is
actually not an uncommon thing among open source companies. For
example QT (Trolltech) and Ximian (a lot of gnome applications) does
the same thing.  Assigning over the code is also something that FSF
requires for all code contributions.  If you criticize us at MySQL AB,
you should also criticize the above.

We did never have any problems to include any of GEMINI code into
MySQL. We had tried to get them to submit Gemini into MySQL since
March, but they didn't want to do that. It was not until we sued
NuSphere for, among other things, breaking the GPL that they did
finally release Gemini under GPL.

We wouldn't mind if they did this 'community thing' with a site named
something like NUSPHERE.ORG, but by doing this with MYSQL.ORG and
violating our trademark is not something that we can just look upon
without reacting.  That NuSphere also have had very little regard for
the GPL copyright, keeps copyrighted material on their web site and
uses mysql.org to push out their own commercial (not free) MySQL
distribution tells a lot of their intentions.

I had actually hoped to get support from you guy's at PostgreSQL
regarding this.  You may have similar experience or at least
understand our position. The RedHat database may be a good thing for
PostgreSQL, but I am not sure if it's a good thing for RedHat or for
the main developers to PostgreSQL. Anyway, I think that we open source
developers should stick together.  We may have our own disagreements,
but at least we are working for the same common goal (open source
domination).

If you ever need any support from us regarding the RedHat database,,
please contact me personally about this.  I really liked all the
PostgreSQL developers I met last year at OSDN; I found it great to be
able to exchange ideas, suggest features and talk openly about our
products without any restrictions.  I hope to be able to do it again
this year!

Those that has seen my postings knows that I don't publicly criticize
PostgreSQL; I do also recommend PostgreSQL for projects where I think
it's better suitable than MySQL. I have at many times defended
PostgreSQL when I heard people criticize it without a good reason.  I
am not afraid of pointing out weaknesses in a product if I am sure
that I have discovered one, but I try to do that in a professional
manner. I don't think you will find that NuSphere is going to be as
fair if they get more control over MySQL through mysql.org.

Jan>     IMHO, the MySQL community gives a few  people  far  too  much
Jan>     credit anyway.  The MySQL AB folks degrade contributions from
Jan>     their community to "personal donations" to "Monty", which  he
Jan>     has  to "scrutinize" and often rewrite so that they can stand
Jan>     their (MySQL AB's) standards. Give me a break, but  does  the
Jan>     entire  MySQL  community  only  consist of 16 year old junior
Jan>     pacman players, or are there  some  "real  programmers  (tm)"
Jan>     too?

I only rewrite things that are going to be in the MySQL server, not in
the clients.  As MySQL needs to work in 24/7 systems, we have to be
very carefully of what we put into the server.  With a background of
20 years of programming, it's also not that hard to rewrite code to
make it better so why not do it?  Because I know the whole MySQL core
code intimately, its much easier for me to remove duplicated functions,
optimize things and generalize code to make things works better than
the original author had thought of.

I am sure that it's the same thing with those of you that has worked a
lot of time on the PostgreSQL code...

You must also understand that we have a totally different development
structure here at MySQL AB than you have. We are 30 people of which 14
are full time developers.  99.99 % of the code in the core MySQL server
is written by us or by people that we have paid for the code.  We get
very few code contributions on the server code from other people (we
do get LOTS of contributions on the client code).

We get the money to develop MySQL from support, licensing and the use
of our trademark.  I don't think you should have any problem with this?
With mysql.org NuSphere is trying to take away 2 of the above things
from us and that's why we have to defend ourselves.

Jan>     But  maybe  Mr.  Mickos told the truth, that there never have
Jan>     been substantial contributions from the  outside  and  nearly
Jan>     all the code has been written by "Monty" himself (with little
Jan>     "donations" from David). In that case, NuSphere's  launch  of
Jan>     mysql.org was long overdue.

Why do you think that?

MySQL AB is a totally open source company.  Everything we develop and
sell we also put on open source.  I think we have are doing and have
always done the right thing for the open source community.

I don't think it's really fair to be compare us to NuSphere :(

Regards,
Monty