FWD: Sign the petition for the future of MySQL

[♥jailaxmi]

I just received an email from the creator of MySQL and thought most of you would be interested. I am simply pasting it here:

 

Hi!

 

I am contacting you because you have in the past shown interest in

MySQL and from that I assume you are interested in the future

well-being of MySQL.

 

Now you have a unique opportunity to make a difference. By signing

the petition at http://www.helpmysql.org you can help affect the

future of MySQL as an Open Source database.

 

You can find more information of this on my latest blog post at:

http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2009/12/help-keep-internet-free.html

 

Help us spread the world about this petition!

http://www.helpmysql.org is available in 18 languages and every vote

is important, independent of from where in the world it comes!

If you know people that are using MySQL, please contact them and

ensure they also sign the petition!

 

Regards,

Monty

Creator of MySQL

 

PS: If you already have signed the petition or know about it, sorry for

reminding you about this! Because of the importance of this issue,

I am trying to contact every person that I have ever communicated

with regarding MySQL.

[Jan Zonjee]

A lot of people have a rather low opinion of mr. Widenius's move. Perhaps it would be wiser to form an opinion for yourself first before actually signing that petition....

[ozEworks]

A lot of people have a rather low opinion of mr. Widenius's move. Perhaps it would be wiser to form an opinion for yourself first before actually signing that petition....

 

The link you give does not add any extra factual information to the debate. It is largely emotive statements relating to the motives of the petition orginator who happens to be the person who developed MySQL and sold it to his employer i.e. Sun. Many people seem jealous that this person earnt a large sum of money from that sale. The fact he sold it to his employer, whom presumably he knew he could trust with its future, is more to the point.

 

Because the issue on the table is can we trust Oracle with it? Oracle is not known for its support of open source. The long time CEO is clearly against it. So in the hands of SUN, we know it to be safe. In the hands of Oracle, it is unclear.

 

Anyone bothering to look at the actual petition wording will see there are several options given relating to the future of MySQL so I am sure people can form their own opinion as if and how to sign.

[Jan Zonjee]

The link you give does not add any extra factual information to the debate.

That is right, but the links in that page do. For example (I didn't read all of it) a page on Groklaw.

 

I am not saying what you should do, I just want to point out that it looks wise to inform yourself before signing that petition because the issue is controversial and not a simple black/white one.

[ozEworks]

All that is on the table here is how people want Oracle to manage MySQL post-sale.

 

The petition wording says:

 

* MySQL must be divested to a suitable third party that can continue to develop it under the GPL.

 

* Oracle must commit to a linking exception for applications that use MySQL with the client libraries (for all programming languages), for plugins and libmysqld. MySQL itself remains licensed under the GPL.

 

* Oracle must release all past and future versions of MySQL (until December 2012) under the Apache Software License 2.0 or similar permissive license so that developers of applications and derived versions (forks) have flexibility concerning the code.

 

 

You can choose none, any or all of the above when signing the petition.

 

Or you can choose not to sign.

[Mark Evans]

In my personal opinion there is much more to the debate than you present here.

 

It seems Monty would like his cake and eat it, he decided on the dual licencing because it suited his needs and now he wants Oracle to change it because he can't achieve what he wants with his new project due to the GPL licence... seems a little hypocritical to me :-"

 

As Jan says though, people need to understand the entire story before signing and the helpmysql site isn't what I would call impartial.

 

Maybe Monty should start a facebook group, there are millions of people there who will sign up for anything just because their friends invite them without even looking what the group is about :rolleyes:

[burt]

http://jan.wildeboer.net/2010/01/why-i-will-not-sign-the-mysql-petition/

[GemRock]

maybe i am missing something but i could not find any serious fault in the petition. yes everyone is entitled to their own opinion and so they can say whatever they like about "monty" - were there not people out there criticised hpdl for all sorts of reasons when we supported hpdl to get the osCommerce name back because we believed that was the right thing to do.

the point or what is important is that oracle takes over sun (and therefore mysql) is a good thing or not, not that monty is good or bad person (which btw is often hard to judge objectively). i would find it funny if anyone tells me it would be a good thing. how would a firm making database as its only business at the same time offer a free database (the one ie mysql as it is now) which can effectively compete with its pay-for database?

sun does not make database - it only provides paid support services with regard to mysql, so selling mysql to sun is a different story, well, at least until about one year ago when sun management decided to release the so called version 5.1.xx despite the objection from monty that v5.1 was not ready (and for this reason he left sun). we all know now, as far as osc is concerned, monty was right and v 5.1.xx wasn't ready.

some critics say monty got quite a bit of money selling mysql to sun, which is why they dont support the petition. as an end user, why should i care about who earns what? was there any objection to the selling of mysql to sun at that time? if not, so why it is now a problem?

what we end users care about would be the continuation of being able to use mysql as a free database product, and better still, in the right hands technically speaking. for this reason, and this reason only, the petition should be supported.

 

Ken

[Mark Evans]

As has been said, everyone has their own opinion on the petition, if people believe it should be signed then go ahead a do so, personally I won't be signing it because I don't believe its the right thing to do in my opinion.

[♥mdtaylorlrim]

how would a firm making database as its only business at the same time offer a free database (the one ie mysql as it is now) which can effectively compete with its pay-for database?

You mean similar to what Microsoft does? (Ok, bad example) It has SQL Server (megabucks) and SQL Express, which is free and redistributable.

[GemRock]

You mean similar to what Microsoft does? (Ok, bad example) It has SQL Server (megabucks) and SQL Express, which is free and redistributable.

yep, you could even mention MSDE as well i suppose? ah, billgates suddenly becomes stupid and gives out *free* sql server! one should know better thats in effect sort of free opium knowing once you are hooked, you will come to them for the real hard drug that will cost lots of cash - guaranteed!

M$ certainly knows once you build your business application around the *free* sql server, you are unlikely to abandon it once reaching its hidden limitations (something M$ wont tell you exactly), and M$ is NOT just making database, it sells its bread earner Visual Studio as well by which you will use to build sql server applications.

 

mysql is a completely different story but thanks for your reminder of M$ *free* database, which would strengthen the case of monty's petition: if we dont stop oracle taking over mysql, it may one day end up at best as a *free* oracle database!

 

Ken

[Mark Evans]

how would a firm making database as its only business at the same time offer a free database (the one ie mysql as it is now) which can effectively compete with its pay-for database?

 

A couple of points.

 

1. MySQL is a very long way from competing with Oracle IMHO (and I doubt it will ever compete)

2. There is nothing stopping anyone from forking mysql (aka MariaDB) and continuing its development, the GPL gives them this right

[GemRock]

A couple of points.

well, in that case i wonder why the European Commission pressed oracle to make promises about the future of mysql. as far as i am concerned, oracle's "promises statement" is in total of jargon and i must say i dont understand for sure or rather its made to be hard to understand so that it would be up to their interpretation in the future, which prompts me to err on the side of caution: its only good NOT to let oracle get its hands on mysql.

 

yes anyone could fork it and in fact monty has done so but i think there is still difference there: why we fought for the name of osCommerce, why not just changed the name to something else and let it be stolen?

 

and whats the benefits of oracle taking over mysql, anyone has any suggestion?

 

Ken

[Mark Evans]

why we fought for the name of osCommerce, why not just changed the name to something else and let it be stolen?

 

This is a totally different situation, protecting the integrity and legal rights to a trademark isn't the same as trying to stop one business buying another.

[GemRock]

This is a totally different situation,

i only referred to the "forking" suggestion, NOT the petition itself.

 

Ken

[Mark Evans]

i only referred to the "forking" suggestion, NOT the petition itself.

 

Then I'm afraid you've confused me as to what your point is :huh:

 

osCommerce has been forked numerous times under different names and as long as they abide by the GPL we haven't tried to stop them. When people try and assume control of something they have no right too then we stop them.

 

The crux of the issue for MySQL is that its dual licenced, which helped Monty back in the old days but prevented many other companies from using it commercially since the licencing fee's were unreasonable (IMHO), now the shoe is on the other foot and the licencing he decided on doesn't suit what he wants to do now (something commercial) so he wants to force Oracle to change it to one that does suit him.

 

Surely people can see the irony in that :-"

[GemRock]

there is no confusion in my post: i only compared the forking suggestion with the name change of oscommerce as at that time some suggested what oscommerce should do.

 

i guess you aren't the person who originally made that remark, as i remember seeing something similar on some blogs RE the petition or monty, which is nothing new as I already mentioned in my earlier posts that it fell into the category of all sorts of criticism towards monty.

ironic or logical, i am the least to be interested in the moral issue, that is, if there is one such issue, surrounding the the petition. my point has always be, and will remain to be, one concerning the FUTURE of mysql, and if you can't answer the following question:

is there any gain to be had if mysql does fall into oracle's hands?

then you should at least NOT to oppose the petition, unless you already decide not to use mysql in the future.

 

Ken

[Mark Evans]

is there any gain to be had if mysql does fall into oracle's hands?

 

1. Money to keep developing MySQL?
   
2. More Enterprise features added to MySQL?
   
3. Easier migration from MySQL to Oracle for large applications?
   

 

Without a crystal ball who knows what will happen, there will always be room for an open source database, if its not MySQL it will be one of the derivatives.

 

What I do know is there is a lot of FUD going around and people screaming "It's the end of the world and mysql is dead if Oracle gets it" without even understanding the complexities of the situation.

[Jan Zonjee]

there will always be room for an open source database, if its not MySQL it will be one of the derivatives.

Just wondering how difficult it would be to use PostgreSQL for osC instead of MySQL... :)

[ozEworks]

The issue that effect mySQL could one day effect PostgreSQL or any other open source/GPL solution. So there is no point in worrying about a replacement until the day comes that mySQL becomes no longer a valid choice. Until then, in my opinion, mySQL is the valid choice because of its popularity. Kids learn it in college like they do php.

[Mark Evans]

Just wondering how difficult it would be to use PostgreSQL for osC instead of MySQL... :)

 

It wouldn't be that hard to switch to PostgreSQL if the need arose, I have toyed with making it work with the current codebase but haven't yet been bored enough in the evenings to get very far.

 

Maybe we should just add Oracle DB support and be done with it :lol:

[Mark Evans]

The issue that effect mySQL could one day effect PostgreSQL

 

Actually PostgreSQL is BSD licenced so the MySQL scenario wouldn't ever happen since there are no dual licencing restrictions.

[Jan Zonjee]

The issue that effect mySQL could one day effect PostgreSQL or any other open source/GPL solution. So there is no point in worrying about a replacement until the day comes that mySQL becomes no longer a valid choice. Until then, in my opinion, mySQL is the valid choice because of its popularity. Kids learn it in college like they do php.

IMHO the most elegant solution would be if osC used a database abstraction layer like MB2. Then this issue would never be a problem.

[GemRock]

without even understanding the complexities of the situation

quite to the contrary, its the complexities of the issue make you unsure about the future of mysql in the hands of oracle and therefore err on the safe side of caution to support the petition. there is surely no or at least i dont believe end of world, but there'd be a better world if we can make it. and how many osc site owners feel the need to migrate to oracle because the inadequacy of mysql as we discuss the issue here only on the very osc forums?

anyway, monty has reportedly given up hope on the EU to block the deal and started to look at other parts of the world, bar the US, who play also a vital role or have a say on the deal.

 

Ken

[Mark Evans]

quite to the contrary, its the complexities of the issue make you unsure about the future of mysql in the hands of oracle and therefore err on the safe side of caution to support the petition. there is surely no or at least i dont believe end of world, but there'd be a better world if we can make it.

 

How will forcing a completely legitimate business transaction to be prevented on one persons say so make a better world? If he is that bothered why doesn't he just offer to buy MySQL from Oracle? He's got a nice $1bn burning a hole in his pocket.

 

and how many osc site owners feel the need to migrate to oracle because the inadequacy of mysql as we discuss the issue here only on the very osc forums?

 

IMHO quite simply none. unless of course they have a few $100k sitting around that they want to spend, for that kind of money I will help them migrate :thumbsup:

 

anyway, monty has reportedly given up hope on the EU to block the deal and started to look at other parts of the world, bar the US, who play also a vital role or have a say on the deal.

 

I think it shows just how little support there is for this petition, 30,000 signatures is all they have managed to get so far. I've not seen a single person in the open-source world who's opinion I take interest in supporting this petition, yet I've heard from a number of them who don't support it. I think thats quite telling really.