My$ql suckers
-
Oh the delicious irony! Remember the discussion about MySQL the other day and how their licensing sucks, now it appears (as per article in todays CP Daily news[^]) they are moving towards making it harder than ever to get their enterprise version without paying for it. MySQL contributors of code and programming time are understandably pissed about it; MySQL is putting all the new features into the "community edition" to be tested and fixed by open source developers so that they can then get it stable and move it to the enterprise version which they charge for. A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results. I always knew those guys were shady from the day I tried to get info about commercial use and licensing and they were complete bastards in response. There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software but hypocrisy I can always get a good hate on for no matter who is doing it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
I was pretty peeved about this too when I heard about it. I mean do they honestly to continue being know as the open source database when they create an image of the DB being crap? I think MySQL enterprise should consist of exactly the same DB as community, a support subscription and a few added tools that make admins life easy. That is it, not some wildly different DB.
-
Oh the delicious irony! Remember the discussion about MySQL the other day and how their licensing sucks, now it appears (as per article in todays CP Daily news[^]) they are moving towards making it harder than ever to get their enterprise version without paying for it. MySQL contributors of code and programming time are understandably pissed about it; MySQL is putting all the new features into the "community edition" to be tested and fixed by open source developers so that they can then get it stable and move it to the enterprise version which they charge for. A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results. I always knew those guys were shady from the day I tried to get info about commercial use and licensing and they were complete bastards in response. There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software but hypocrisy I can always get a good hate on for no matter who is doing it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
This is what I was asking about in the article I linked to the other day. So sad really. MySQL is a good product, a pity the "owners" are screwing it up. Could someone take the current MySQL codebase, fork it and start an independant project that doesn't feed into the enterprise version from MySQL AB?
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
-
This is what I was asking about in the article I linked to the other day. So sad really. MySQL is a good product, a pity the "owners" are screwing it up. Could someone take the current MySQL codebase, fork it and start an independant project that doesn't feed into the enterprise version from MySQL AB?
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
Paul Watson wrote:
Could someone take the current MySQL codebase, fork it and start an independant project that doesn't feed into the enterprise version from MySQL AB?
They should. And it's an obvious thing to do in this case, but perhaps they either have no guts, or are afraid to be remembered for fracturing an already fractured Open Source community by breaking away from a corporate boss:rolleyes:. MySQL is too big of a project for one person (unlike the project i'm working on and prepared to fork if the current "owner" and i won't come to a agreement on a few things) but it's still in good enough shape to attract a decent developer community to keep it doing. Roswell
"Angelinos -- excuse me. There will be civility today."
Antonio VillaRaigosa
City Mayor, Los Angeles, CA -
Oh the delicious irony! Remember the discussion about MySQL the other day and how their licensing sucks, now it appears (as per article in todays CP Daily news[^]) they are moving towards making it harder than ever to get their enterprise version without paying for it. MySQL contributors of code and programming time are understandably pissed about it; MySQL is putting all the new features into the "community edition" to be tested and fixed by open source developers so that they can then get it stable and move it to the enterprise version which they charge for. A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results. I always knew those guys were shady from the day I tried to get info about commercial use and licensing and they were complete bastards in response. There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software but hypocrisy I can always get a good hate on for no matter who is doing it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
That is why I try to stay away from any Open Source that is not BSD. Too many people get tempted by greed for one reason or another. Personally, I just put my eggs in MS basket, there are already driven by greed as any large corporation for the most part, so no surprises there ;)
Rocky <>< Latest Code Blog Post: www.TheWPFDirectory.com site launched! Latest Tech Blog Post: Vista ReadyBoost!
-
Oh the delicious irony! Remember the discussion about MySQL the other day and how their licensing sucks, now it appears (as per article in todays CP Daily news[^]) they are moving towards making it harder than ever to get their enterprise version without paying for it. MySQL contributors of code and programming time are understandably pissed about it; MySQL is putting all the new features into the "community edition" to be tested and fixed by open source developers so that they can then get it stable and move it to the enterprise version which they charge for. A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results. I always knew those guys were shady from the day I tried to get info about commercial use and licensing and they were complete bastards in response. There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software but hypocrisy I can always get a good hate on for no matter who is doing it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results.
Microsoft does the same thing. It's called CTP's and Beta's. But yes, I've gotten completely disallusioned with GPL, when a company can take GPL'd code themselves and incorporate it into a commercial closed source product but others can't. Seems like a double standard.
John Cardinal wrote:
There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software
Same here. And what I particularly don't like is when an open source project goes commercial and the source just disappears. That's downright evil. Marc
-
Oh the delicious irony! Remember the discussion about MySQL the other day and how their licensing sucks, now it appears (as per article in todays CP Daily news[^]) they are moving towards making it harder than ever to get their enterprise version without paying for it. MySQL contributors of code and programming time are understandably pissed about it; MySQL is putting all the new features into the "community edition" to be tested and fixed by open source developers so that they can then get it stable and move it to the enterprise version which they charge for. A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results. I always knew those guys were shady from the day I tried to get info about commercial use and licensing and they were complete bastards in response. There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software but hypocrisy I can always get a good hate on for no matter who is doing it.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
This is what I was asking about in the article I linked to the other day. So sad really. MySQL is a good product, a pity the "owners" are screwing it up. Could someone take the current MySQL codebase, fork it and start an independant project that doesn't feed into the enterprise version from MySQL AB?
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Shog9 wrote:
And with that, Paul closed his browser, sipped his herbal tea, fixed the flower in his hair, and smiled brightly at the multitude of cute, furry animals flocking around the grassy hillside where he sat coding Ruby on his Mac...
That would be a great thing to see, tbh it should happen more when OSS projects go closed source. The Redhat/Fedora thing always seemed to work well though, i guess they can use fedora as a testbed but at the same time provide an OS that fits the requirements of the home / client users while maintaining the enterprise version as a more stable and less ambitious project.
-
John Cardinal wrote:
A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results.
Microsoft does the same thing. It's called CTP's and Beta's. But yes, I've gotten completely disallusioned with GPL, when a company can take GPL'd code themselves and incorporate it into a commercial closed source product but others can't. Seems like a double standard.
John Cardinal wrote:
There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software
Same here. And what I particularly don't like is when an open source project goes commercial and the source just disappears. That's downright evil. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
Microsoft does the same thing. It's called CTP's and Beta's.
Well to be fair Microsoft isn't expecting their users to do all the hard work of writing the software for them and doing all the initial bug testing, coming up with new ideas etc etc.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
-
John Cardinal wrote:
A beautiful business model really: get all your coding and testing and bug fixing done for free by open source suckers programmers and sell the results.
Microsoft does the same thing. It's called CTP's and Beta's. But yes, I've gotten completely disallusioned with GPL, when a company can take GPL'd code themselves and incorporate it into a commercial closed source product but others can't. Seems like a double standard.
John Cardinal wrote:
There are a lot of things I don't like about most open source free software
Same here. And what I particularly don't like is when an open source project goes commercial and the source just disappears. That's downright evil. Marc
Absolutely evil. And it is happening more often! Makes one really question the motivation behind "the movement" And Stallman himself. He must be aware that is very words are capitalized by the very big business he sees issue with. Maybe he is on the "$take"
Free new laptop giveaway ever 30 days. No strings, no spam... For legitimacy concerns, some of the people behind next2friends reside at Genetibase (^)
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
Microsoft does the same thing. It's called CTP's and Beta's.
Well to be fair Microsoft isn't expecting their users to do all the hard work of writing the software for them and doing all the initial bug testing, coming up with new ideas etc etc.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
John Cardinal wrote:
coming up with new ideas
Microsoft come up with new ideas? I haven't seen any new ideas from Microsoft since, geez, forever. A lot of borrowed ideas, yeah, but new? No.
John Cardinal wrote:
isn't expecting their users to do all the hard work of writing the software for them and doing all the initial bug testing
ok. Point for Microsoft. :) Marc
-
Unhappy? I'm laughing about the sheer audacity of the plan. Technically, no they are not violating any license perhaps but they are certainly taking advantage of the developers that worked on it. I've become increasingly curious about PostgreSQL, we currently use Firebird as an alternative to Microsoft SQL server for our commercial apps and I've been quite happy with it because you can distribute the "embedded" server as a relatively small .dll with your application making it ideal for trial downloads and people can easily move that database to a full fledged server without any conversion later on if they wish, if PostgreSQL had anything like that I might be even more interested. I took a quick look at their website after reading your post but it seems long on marketing and hype and short on practical info.
"I don't want more choice. I just want better things!" - Edina Monsoon
Well, the way I see it MySQL AB, the company behind MySQL, currently talks of releasing two versions. A community edition and an enterprise edition. They have made it clear that they'd only provide the enterprise edition for those who can pay for it; they will provide support and services for those people too. The community edition will be free for use by developers. The ethically disturbing point is making profit out of ideas/code that other people have contributed, right? Well even in a small organized group such things happen, and to alleviate any form of conflict or dilemma such people are paid good, and sometimes (or always) given publicity. And if you are one such subject who has received money then we'd most probably be happy about it and keep quiet. Expecting to be rewarded is one aspect; being recognized is another. And for most human beings these two things should be balanced or given in equal proportion. The GPL is not something designed to reward people. It is designed to maintain a community wherein people can share, modify, distribute and live in harmony. It is designed to protect your identity, not destroy it. The feeling of wanting to be rewarded is something personal. I know a lot of developers have contributed to both the editions for no charge. But the Enterprise edition is still going to be "free software", it does not destroy the identity of all those who contributed for the product. People are going to pay for services - something like trouble shooting, upgrading, installation, and buying the product (from them), documentation, etc. (This is different from making profit from ideas/code that other people contributed. This is more like support work). They did not say that they are going to make enterprise edition closed source. It will still technically comply with the GPLv2. The community edition is available for free. I imagine that this thing is not something user-friendly, but since it is free you can develop on it, and make it user friendly. Bottom line,we have to wait and see how the MySQL model turn out to be. It is too early to jump in conclusions that are otherwise shocking to the open source community.