postgre vs MySQL

[Scott Marlowe-2]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Chris Browne <cbbrowne@...> wrote:

> craig@... (Craig Ringer) writes:
>  > Erik Jones wrote:
>  >> They've gotten around that by making MySQL "dual-licensed".  If
>  >> you're going to be using MySQL in a commercial application then you
>  >> can not use the GPL'd version, you have to use their paid,
>  >> commercial license.
>  >>
>  > My understanding is that's not quite true. The client libraries are
>  > GPL, so you can't use them directly, but I don't see what would stop
>  > you using their ODBC/JDBC drivers with your non-GPL application
>  > (especially if you support other ODBC databases as well). The server
>  > can't be bundled in your application, but you can still get the user
>  > to install it and use it with your application.
>
>  Well, there's a certain amount of distance between "expectations" and
>  "legal requirements," and lots of room for weasel wording...
>
>
>  <http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?4,31,888#msg-888>
>
> <http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/>
>
>  According to the above things that MySQL AB has said/continues to say,
>  it is quite clear that the owners of the code *intend* that
>  "commercial users" should pay them a licensing fee,

Read this earlier response where Zak makes it quite clear that web
services that are run in house do not violate the GPL terms for the
distribution of MySQL.

http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?4,31,63#msg-63

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

[Dave Page-7]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 5:07 PM, David Wall <d.wall@...> wrote:

>
>  > I imagine you can get round the second one by building your software
>  > so it supports PostgreSQL as well - that way you don't 'require
>  > customes to install MySQL'.
>  >
>  Well, I'm not sure how they'd even know you were doing this, but as a
>  commercial company, I'd suggest you not follow that advice since the
>  code would not work without install MySQL.  Yes, they could install PG
>  instead, and if they did, MySQL would have no problem.  But if you use
>  MySQL, then clearly it's required and a commercial license would be
>  required (though perhaps at least you'd put the legal obligation on the
>  end customer).

Huh? I'm suggesting that you write your code to be
database-independent such that it is the user's choice what DBMS he
uses. That way you aren't 'requiring them to install MySQL'. MySQL
cannot hold you liable if a customer chooses to use your closed source
Java/JDBC app with their DBMS if you didn't require it.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK Ltd: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

[Russell Smith]

Dave Page wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 5:07 PM, David Wall <d.wall@...> wrote:
>  
>>  > I imagine you can get round the second one by building your software
>>  > so it supports PostgreSQL as well - that way you don't 'require
>>  > customes to install MySQL'.
>>  >
>>  Well, I'm not sure how they'd even know you were doing this, but as a
>>  commercial company, I'd suggest you not follow that advice since the
>>  code would not work without install MySQL.  Yes, they could install PG
>>  instead, and if they did, MySQL would have no problem.  But if you use
>>  MySQL, then clearly it's required and a commercial license would be
>>  required (though perhaps at least you'd put the legal obligation on the
>>  end customer).
>>    
>
> Huh? I'm suggesting that you write your code to be
> database-independent such that it is the user's choice what DBMS he
> uses. That way you aren't 'requiring them to install MySQL'. MySQL
> cannot hold you liable if a customer chooses to use your closed source
> Java/JDBC app with their DBMS if you didn't require it.
>
>  

Yes, that is MySQL's licensing angle.  I have spoken numerous times to
MySQL staff about it.  So what ended up happening for my software
development was it became a waste of time to support MySQL and
PostgreSQL, I moved to PostgreSQL solely which didn't have any of those
restrictions associated with it.  Which is how I got into PostgreSQL in
the first place.  And now I use MySQL when I have to because PostgreSQL
does the job for me and I'm used to writing SQL, plpgsql and the like
for it.

Russell Smith

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

[Ron Mayer]

Greg Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
>> A silly question in this context:  If we know of a company that does
>> use PostgreSQL but doesn't list it anywhere ... can we take the
>> liberty to publicise this somewhere anyway?

I notice Oracle (and sleepycat before them) had a lot of fun
pointing out when Microsoft uses BDB.

http://www.oracle.com/technology/oramag/oracle/07-jan/o17opensource.html
    You'll find Oracle Berkeley DB "under the hood" in everything
    from Motorola cell phones, Microsoft/Groove's collaboration suite

and it seems unlikely Microsoft gave them their blessings.

> Bad idea.  There are companies who consider being listed as a user of a
> product a sort of recommendation of that technology, and accordingly

Other reasons a company might get offended by this:

  * They might consider it a trade secret and a competitive advantage
    over competitors; and internally enjoy giggling when they see
    their competitors sign deals with expensive databases.

  * They might have a close business partnership with Microsoft
    or Oracle that could be strained if they support other databases.

I suspect my employer would not like it announced for both reasons.

> they will get really annoyed...asked to be removed from the list of
> those using PostgreSQL.  ... PostgreSQL inside, it's best not to
> publish the results unless you like to collect cease & desist letters.

While I agree companies are likely to get annoyed - just like fast
food companies do when you say how much trans-fats their products
contain; I'm rather curious what such a cease&desist letter would say.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

[Erik Jones]

On Mar 15, 2008, at 8:58 AM, Ron Mayer wrote:

> Greg Smith wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote:
>>> A silly question in this context:  If we know of a company that  
>>> does use PostgreSQL but doesn't list it anywhere ... can we take  
>>> the liberty to publicise this somewhere anyway?
>
> I notice Oracle (and sleepycat before them) had a lot of fun
> pointing out when Microsoft uses BDB.
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/oramag/oracle/07-jan/o17opensource.html
>   You'll find Oracle Berkeley DB "under the hood" in everything
>   from Motorola cell phones, Microsoft/Groove's collaboration suite
>
> and it seems unlikely Microsoft gave them their blessings.
>
>> Bad idea.  There are companies who consider being listed as a user  
>> of a product a sort of recommendation of that technology, and  
>> accordingly
>
> Other reasons a company might get offended by this:
>
> * They might consider it a trade secret and a competitive advantage
>   over competitors; and internally enjoy giggling when they see
>   their competitors sign deals with expensive databases.
>
> * They might have a close business partnership with Microsoft
>   or Oracle that could be strained if they support other databases.
>
> I suspect my employer would not like it announced for both reasons.
>
>> they will get really annoyed...asked to be removed from the list of
>> those using PostgreSQL.  ... PostgreSQL inside, it's best not to
>> publish the results unless you like to collect cease & desist  
>> letters.
>
> While I agree companies are likely to get annoyed - just like fast
> food companies do when you say how much trans-fats their products
> contain; I'm rather curious what such a cease&desist letter would say.

Probably just a firm,  but polite, request to quit it.  I'd say that  
with a completely open piece of software like Postgres, i.e. where no  
commercial licensing is involved, the question is more ethical than  
legal.  In fact, I can't think of a situation where "mind your own  
business" could be take more literally :)

Erik Jones

DBA | Emma®
erik@...
800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888
615.292.0777 (fax)

Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style.
Visit us online at http://www.myemma.com




--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

[Joshua D. Drake]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:26:35 -0500
Erik Jones <erik@...> wrote:

> > While I agree companies are likely to get annoyed - just like fast
> > food companies do when you say how much trans-fats their products
> > contain; I'm rather curious what such a cease&desist letter would
> > say.
>
> Probably just a firm,  but polite, request to quit it.  I'd say that  
> with a completely open piece of software like Postgres, i.e. where
> no commercial licensing is involved, the question is more ethical
> than legal.  In fact, I can't think of a situation where "mind your
> own business" could be take more literally :)

Sometimes they may also claim trademark or trade secret issues.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drkae


- --
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
      PostgreSQL political pundit | Mocker of Dolphins

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFH3pQoATb/zqfZUUQRAt8iAJ9yLSuV4LQXeUl238VOk6k9VLwdYACgqdkW
bGvcvjIUVMj0VZetffDhYhY=
=91uz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general