[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Neil Williams wrote:
You've just explained why it almost certainly wont happen - MySql would loose 99% if its user base overnight. But the name would have to change if it did - thats a trademark.On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 16:11:04 +0000 tom <tompotts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Also on face book Save My sql <http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=401680840234> It would sadden me to see MySql loosing it's GPLDoh! - you never LOOSE GPL - you can never un GPL code.True. The only requirement is that someone still has access to the latest version of the code before the licence changes. For MySQL, that is a given. See FEMM for an example of where this was a potential problem: http://femm.neil.williamsleesmill.me.uk/This MySql campaign thing is the weirdest thing I've seen in a while - I can only assume that MS are behind the campaign as part of somebroader FUDing to give the rumour that MySql may dissappear a more self-fulfilling role - the name might but the code wont.It's the next versions that would be missing - along with security fixes and preventing bitrot. i.e. as long as the community continue hacking on the current MySQL GPL'd code, there's nothing to save - it's a fork and the GPL is particularly protective of the ability to fork GPL code. Forks have compatibility issues which get worse the longer the two versions remain unlinked - I don't run any commercial MySQL instances, does anyone have real data on whether the two are 100% compatible currently? Forks don't have to change the name, it depends on the attitude of the two teams and horrors like trademarks, cf iceweasel. What we *don't* want is dozens of different MySQL forks. If the link with commercial MySQL is lost, that's bad but it's not disastrous.
Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html