felix@crowfix.com writes:
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 02:11:54PM -0700, felix@crowfix.com wrote:
>>
>> What am I missing?
>
> [ many answers ]
>
> Ahhh ... I did not realize they were selling a commercial version with
> a dual license. I had thought they were selling support contracts.
>
> I confess I find this weird too. I can't see why someone wouild
> want to distribute their own private label version of MySQL, unless
> they were making significant changes, and then I can't see why
> anyone would want to buy such a version. But I have met many
> people, not just corporate types, who think $0 = worthless, and $$
> not as good as $$$$$$, even for the exact same piece of gear.
That's part of the reason that MySQL AB went around to all of the
MySQL database adaptor guys and hired them and changed the license on
them to the GPL. There were lots of people that wanted to include a
database with their software and LGPLed drivers let them do that even
if the database itself was under the GPL. Now with GPLed drivers for
MySQL if you distribute your application you either need a commercial
license of MySQL or you need to GPL your application. MySQL made a
pretty penny convincing application writers that they needed a
commercial license of MySQL if their application wasn't distributed
under the GPL.
It wasn't about support contracts per se, but rather about being able
to include an inexpensive database with a commercial application. In
some ways that actually shouldn't be a problem since the drivers are
the part get gets "linked" with the commercial application, and they
are still owned by MySQL AB. However, it's going to look funny if
MySQL AB has to offer MySQL itself under the GPL in order to include
InnoDB tables and they simply sell the database drivers under a
commercial license.
Any way you look at it, there are interesting times ahead for MySQL
AB. Personally I think that it is just Karma. After years of
disinformation they are getting what they deserve.
Jason