Re: MySQL Gemini code

Michael Widenius wrote:
>
> Hi!

Moin Monty,
dear fence-guests,

> 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.
   I should not criticize the others and Trond already explained   why (thank you).
   All I was doing was summing  up  some  of  the  latest  press   releases  from NuSphere and MySQL AB. You as CTO and
yourown   CEO have explained detailed  enough  why  the  assignment  of   copyright  for  all  core system related code
isso important   for your company because of  your  business  modell.  As  the   original banker I am, and as the 13+
yearIT consultant I am,   I don't have the slightest problem with that  and  understand   it  completely.  It's  not
my business at all anyway, so it   doesn't matter if I personally think it's good or not.
 
   But NuSphere said, that the  problem  with  contributing  the   Gemini  code  was because of the copyright
questions.Looking   at the code now and realizing that it's part of the  Progress   storage  system  fits  perfectly.
NuSphere might  have  had   permission from Progress to release it under the GPL, but not   to  assign  the copyright
toMySQL AB. The copyright of parts   of the Gemini code  is  still  property  of  Progress  (Britt   please  come  down
fromthe fence and correct me if I'm wrong   here).
 

> 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).
   The RedHAT  database  IS  PostgreSQL.  And  I  don't  see  it   becoming something different. All I've seen up to
nowis that   RedHAT will be a contributing member of the  PostgreSQL  open   source  community  in the same way,
PostgreSQLInc. and Great   Bridge LLC are. That they use BIG RED letters while  GB  uses   BIG  BLUE  ones  and  PgSQL
Inc. a  bavarian  mix  for  the   marketing, yeah - that's marketing - these folks  like  logos   and  colors.  The
realdifference will mature somehow in the   service portfolios  over  time.  And  since  there  are  many   different
customers with  a broad variety of demands, we'll   all find more food than we can eat. No need to fight  against
eachother.
 
   The  major advantage in the PostgreSQL case is, that we don't   need no dispute about licensing, because  whoever
thinks he   can  make  a  deal  out  of  keeping something proprietary is   allowed to. People contributing under  the
BSD license  are   just  self-confident  enough  to know that this will become a   niche solution or die anyway.
 
   And there we are at the point about "support regarding THIS".   If  you're  asking for support for the MySQL
project,well, I   created two procedural languages in  PostgreSQL  so  far  and   know  enough  about  the  query
rewritingtechniques used by   Stonebraker and his team to implement  views  in  PostgreSQL.   As  the open source
developerI am, I might possibly find one   or the other spare hour to  create  something  similar.   The   reason  I
didit for PostgreSQL was because a couple of years   ago Bruce Momjian asked me to fix the rule system. Noone ever
asked me to do anything for MySQL.  But if you're asking for   direct support for your  company,  sorry,  but  I'm  a
Great  Bridge employee and that's clearly against my interests.
 


> 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.
   That  is  what  your  CEO  said  on  NewsForge,  SlashDot and   whereever.  I am committed to free source. Thus I
think that   the best thing for open source is a free community, which and   who's product is not controlled by any
commercialentity.
 

> I don't think it's really fair to be compare us to NuSphere :(
   Did I? That wasn't my intention.  And  nothing  I  wrote  was   meant  personally.  Even if the PostgreSQL and MySQL
projects  had some differences  in  the  past,  there  has  never  been   something between Monty and Jan (not to my
knowledge).
   Let's  meet  next week at O'Reilly (you're there, aren't you)   and have a beer.


Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com