Re: [OT] question about open source data base selection

[Erik Weber]

Thanks Ted. Yes, I dig the BSD-style license, and I sure am glad Apache 
is aligned that way. Too bad there doesn't seem to be a database on par 
with MySQL under a BSD-style license, but PostgreSQL is at least 
something I think I can work with. The GPL style license is just as 
important to have around, but to me, developing under it is more for 
those who can afford it (those who have a company sponsoring their open 
source work that wants to invest in the community). For a guy like me, 
trying to make it as a freelancer, GPL just doesn't fit the bill. How 
could I make any money that way? And yet if it weren't for GPL products, 
I wouldn't be here at all. I'm a die-hard Linux guy, and I think the 
Linux kernel is a great example of what GPL can accomplish.

Maybe I will start writing a database and release it under a 
hybrid-style license. You have to give up 5 out of every 10 secrets. :) 
I've been wanting to do some C++ instead of Java anyway. :) Anyone want 
to sponsor me?

Erik
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/linux-kernel-cost.html

Ted Husted wrote:
On 4/13/05, Erik Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 

I get the feeling that the GPL restrictions (at least in MySQL's case)
are meant for those who are taking the database and specializing it for
their business (by altering or extending the source code) not just
merely using it to power the data access layer of a site architecture
(or even a desktop application with an embedded model -- but it depends
on what they mean by "distribute"; 
   

Distribute a software product to a third-party that they can load onto
their own hardware.
The license is designed to cover circumstances when you are
distributing a product to another party or modifying the source. Even
the GPL is free for you to use out of the box for your own
applications. The strings kick in when you distribute a software
product to someone else to use on hardware you don't own, or modify
the source -- even for your own use.
The "modification" clause is why many businesses do not use GPL
software. They can't modify the source, even for internal use, without
their own work being encumbered by the GPL.
It is sad that there are not more high-power database systems under
BSD or Apache-style licenses, since these complications do not apply.
If you distribute ASF software to a third party, you must acknowledge
our copyright and license, but the software is otherwise free. If you
modify the software for your own use, under the Apache License, your
work is still your own.
If you are distributing a product to others that includes GPL
software, and you don't want to put your own work under the GPL, the
end-user has to download the GPL package separately (e.g. MySQL) and
then plug it in. (And you also have to be careful about how the
plugging in process works.) If you distribute the product as a
ready-to-go bundle, then the viral aspects of the GPL kick in, and
your package must be GPL too. :(
-Ted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]