Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com)
Linux.com reports
on a change in the distribution of MySQL Enterprise Server source code.
"MySQL quietly let slip that it would no longer be distributing the MySQL Enterprise Server source as a tarball, not quite a year after the company announced a split between its paid and free versions. While the Enterprise Server code is still under the GNU General Public License (GPL), MySQL is making it harder for non-customers to access the source code.
Kaj Arnö, the company's vice president of community relations, wrote that the Enterprise tarballs "will be removed from ftp.mysql.com. These will move to enterprise.mysql.com, and will be available for our paying subscribers only.""
(Log in to post comments)
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 19:23 UTC (Thu) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link] This is entirely legal under the GPL, one might add, and it's not even using a loophole: the GPL is only supposed to ensure (as far as distribution is concerned, that is) that those who receive the program also receive the corresponding source code. Distribution to anyone else is not required, but as long as the source remains under the GPL, anyone else can just upload the tarball elsewhere, so there's not actually any problem here.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 19:39 UTC (Thu) by brouhaha (subscriber, #1698) [Link] If they own the copyright, they can distribute it under any terms they want, and they are not bound by the GPL, though anyone they redistribute it to will be bound by the GPL or whatever other license they distribute it under.
If the MySQL Enterprise distribution in question contains any GPLv2 code for which they do not own the copyright, there is some possibility that what they are doing will satisfy the GPL. Making a determination would require more information on their policies.
For any such code, in order to comply with GPLv2, they would have to meet the requirements of either part A or part B of section 3. Part A is satisfied if the binary distribution is accompanied by the source code on a medium customarily used for software interchange (e.g., a CD-ROM). Otherwise, part B requires that they make an offer TO ANY THIRD PARTY to distribute the source code on such a medium, for no more than the cost of physically performing that distribution..
So if there is any code for which they do not own the copyright, and they are relying on part B, *ANYONE* can ask them for the source code, and they have to provide it.
Red Hat has taken the opposite approach with Red Hat Enterprise Linux. They only make binaries available to their customers, but the sources are available for download by anyone.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 20:07 UTC (Thu) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] One correction to what you said: In addition to the SRPMS on the public mirror, Red Hat also offers source code to its own customers. Source ISO and SRPMS are available in RHN.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 5:48 UTC (Fri) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link] If the MySQL Enterprise distribution in question contains any GPLv2 code for which they do not own the copyright, there is some possibility that what they are doing will satisfy the GPL. Making a determination would require more information on their policies. I believe MySQL AB requires copyright assignment for any patches that they intend to fold into the main release, for exactly this reason.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 19:48 UTC (Thu) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648) [Link] Just curious, didn't I recently read a different story? Something to do with GPL code in Linksys routers (or similar). The argument was that all the code Linksys allegedly used had to be released to anyone who so requested it; not just to those who received/used the end-user product (in these cases, routers, network switches, or similar). Of course, the Linksys deal is mostly firmware and EEPROM software. Perhaps I'm mistaken; please correct me if so. One last question: Assuming someone actually did grab MySQL's enterprise source tarball and posted it online somewhere else for anyone to fetch, would MySQL have any legal recourse under the GPL to stop this?
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 20:06 UTC (Thu) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link] > One last question: Assuming someone actually did grab MySQL's enterprise source tarball and posted it online somewhere else for anyone to fetch, would MySQL have any legal recourse under the GPL to stop this?
No, because that's exactly what GPL is about. You may always help your neighbour.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 22:22 UTC (Thu) by jsarets (guest, #39560) [Link] So this is just one step more complicated than the CentOS relationship.A paying customer has to grab the source and pass it on to the community. Then a community project can build and distribute the binaries. They can call it OurSQL.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 15:29 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
The source is still available publicly via bitkeeper.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 21:09 UTC (Thu) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link] > Something to do with GPL code in Linksys routers (or similar). The> argument was that all the code Linksys allegedly used had to be > released to anyone who so requested it; not just to those who > received/used the end-user product (in these cases, routers, > network switches, or similar).
The GPL allows you to distribute source ONLY to your customers IFF you give them the source code with the binaries OR you give said customers a written offer of the source code in hardcopy for the cost of the media.
Alternatly, you have the option of distributing the source code over the network and including instructions on how get at it with the object code, but then the source code must be made "publically avaliable," in that it has to be given to anyone on request free-of-charge. This is a carrot-and-stick provision of the GPL to encourage companies to bundle the source code with the object code.
In the case of Linksys, they did not include the source code or any offer to provide the source code to their customers, so the only reasonble way for them to come into compliance with the GPL is offer the code over the network (with the added requirements then that it be made avaliable at zero-cost to the general public). Technically they'd still be in violation because their customers didn't recieve written instructions on how to retrive the code when they got the device.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 1:18 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] so how does what MySQL is doing match the criteria you outlined?
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 3:57 UTC (Fri) by jordanb (guest, #45668) [Link] MySQL is bundling their source code with the object code when they distribute it to their customers and therefore are not required to offer it "publically at zero-cost" on the network.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 23:02 UTC (Fri) by brouhaha (subscriber, #1698) [Link] The GPL allows you to distribute source ONLY to your customers IFF you give them the source code with the binaries OR you give said customers a written offer of the source code in hardcopy for the cost of the media.Incorrect!!! The GPL allows you to distribute source ONLY to your customers IFF you give them the source code with the binaries. If you give the customers a written offer for the source code, that offer has to be good for ANY THIRD PARTY, not just your customers.
just like LWN. :) Posted Aug 9, 2007 19:39 UTC (Thu) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] ...predictable releases which become generally available with time, and a subscriber can share them too.
In both cases I'm a "general public" though.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 21:07 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (guest, #15888) [Link] MySQL Enterprise server? Isn't that an oxymoron?
(Yes, I'm PostgreSQL biased.)
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 21:14 UTC (Thu) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link] If you are that much "enterprise", you would use Oracle instead.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 9, 2007 22:21 UTC (Thu) by AJWM (guest, #15888) [Link] Probably true. However, having been at various times a developer, a DBA, and a sysadmin, Oracle scares the crap out of me ;-) (Well, maybe not "scares". Disgusts? Nauseates?)
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 9:38 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] That's OK: `enterprise' means 'expensive', not 'pleasant' or even 'useful'.
(also slaving in the Oracle tar pits and permanently disgusted)
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 4:33 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Believe it or not people do actually use Mysql on a large scale. Larger scales then anything people use Postgresql for. (for whatever reason. I don't care if Postgresql is better or not)
If you want to look at what people actually use rather then what other people _think_ they should use then Mysql does certainly have a Enterprise nitch in the greater db world.
I don't really care about you-vs-mine database or anything other like that, I have no idea about the differences.. and I don't really care.
What I find is hilarious is that _every_single_f-ing_time_ (that is with out fail, nearly 100% reliably) mysql is mentioned for any reason anywhere on the internet in any way there is always at least one person who trolls about how postgresql is 'better', 'more enterprise'-ish, how everybody who uses Mysql is a moron, how they can't believe anybody uses Mysql when the 'obviously superior' postgresql is around, or how the GPL is a inferior license or any other number of related things, how Mysql is way to expensive, or variations on this meme, or combination of above. It's getting very old.
A database is just a application. It's generic. It's like a compiler or a text editor. Everybody has their own preferences for whatever reason. It's long gone to were having a database is a special thing.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 16:45 UTC (Fri) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] and every time postgres is mentioned someone posts about how much better/faster/more popular MySQL is. :-)
no, it's not a good thing. but every group has people who overdo the advocacy. neither set of posts is done by people contributing to the projects, they are done by fans
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 8:36 UTC (Fri) by mbottrell (guest, #43008) [Link] Depends.
Many Enterprises require a MySQL application for their commercial apps that require a db backend. As such this database suits.
I see MySQL and PostgreSQL as seperate beasts, but have similar functions.
Yeah, PostgreSQL is great as an OSS Oracle replacement, but MySQL is still used in many LAMP environments.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 16:46 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] I know few installations where MySQL is handling over 100000000 transactions per day (close to 1000000000 in one case). If this is not "Enterprise level", then what is ?
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 10, 2007 17:52 UTC (Fri) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link] Is it that hard to put the comma's or period's in the number? 100,000,000 or 100.000.000 isn't that hard to type, not only that it makes it a heck of a lot easier to actually see how many you are talking about rather than forcing the reader to count the zeros. Most languages also consider the comma's and periods required, not optional. It's also a lot nicer to the readers of your comment, unless of course you don't want people to read your comment.
MySQL ends distribution of Enterprise source tarballs (Linux.com) Posted Aug 14, 2007 13:01 UTC (Tue) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link] I didn't actually count the zeros. And just psycho-translated "1 with many zeros" to mean "more than a few".
|
|||||||||||||