Justin,
I very much agree with your compliment to Jeremy for his posting.
Some notes on your posting follow.
At 14/07/01 14:03 +0200, Justin wrote:
>Personally, I could care less about the mysql.org
>domain issue. I, more or less, see it just as another
>kind of ex-officio site supporting some Open Source
>effort. I cannot see why it would lead to confusion
>as to who is "leading" the MySQL development, as the
>information presented on the site makes everything
>very clear.
Yes, now the mysql.org site is much clearer. At the time of our press
announcement, the site looked different. The infringement of our trademark
in the name of the site has not been cured, however.
>But, somehow, possession of this domain
>is important to both of the "disputing" parties for
>reasons only known best to them. I think in the
>long run, to the community, the more sites/domains
>dedicated to the promotion of MySQL, the better.
To be specific: MySQL AB does not oppose the existence of community
websites. On the contrary, we encourage them.
But we are opposed to violations of our trademark and other rights, to the
lack of identification of the people/organisations behind it or affiliated
with it , and to anybody requiring registration before allowing downloading
of our GPL software. The identification issue has now been fixed on
mysql.org, and we are happy about that move, and Britt said in his recent
posting that the registration issue has been fixed. We now look forward to
seeing the intellectual property issues cured as well.
>As for NuSphere being perceived as violating the GPL,
>it appears that they have just not handled it very
>well in their, er, "PR", as, if the NuSphere exposed
>position is taken on face value, namely they have
>submitted their changes, but the community has
>not been really made "aware" of this because of the
>complex relationship between NuSphere/MySQL which,
>also, was not made clear by either party until
>recently.
I would say "violating the GPL" and "submitting their changes" are two
different things (and maybe you would, too).
Regarding the GPL violation we state the following: NuSphere is and has
been shipping a product that includes the MySQL server under GPL and the
Gemini component, with the Gemini component statically linked to the MySQL
server. The source code of Gemini or a written offer to provide it is not
included in the package, wherefore this constitutes a violation of GPL.
When it comes to "submitting changes" there might be more than one
discussion threads, and I might not personally be aware of all of them.
I'll try to cover those that I believe are relevant and hope I cover what
you intended.
First thread: In case somebody thinks so, it is NOT possible to cure a GPL
violation by submitting source code to MySQL AB. The source code or the
written offer has to be in the product that is delivered to customers.
Second thread: We at MySQL AB have not refused to accept Gemini source code
into the tree, nor have we required transfer of copyright of it to us, or
shared copyright (if anybody thought so).
Third thread: There was a situation where NuSphere asked us to include in
the MySQL server a crypting function that had been developed by a third
party (not NuSphere, not MySQL AB). In the absence of shared copyright for
us to the piece of code in question, we refused to take it in. This is a
principle we have been following always, and it is followed by other open
source companies as well, and by the Free Software Foundation (FSF).
I hope the above adds clarity.
Marten Mickos
CEO
MySQL AB
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Before posting, please check:
http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual)
http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive)
To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
