Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sun May Begin Close Sourcing MySQL Features

samzenpus posted more than 6 years ago | from the closing-up dept.

Databases 509

An anonymous reader writes "From the MySQL User's Conference, Sun has announced, and former CEO Marten Mickos has confirmed, that Sun will be close sourcing sections of the MySQL code base. Sun will begin with close sourcing the backup solutions to MySQL, and will continue with more advanced features. With Oracle owning Innodb, and it being GPL, does this mean that MySQL will be removing it to introduce these features? Sun has had a very poor history of actually open sourcing anything."

cancel ×

509 comments

This is great news.... (5, Insightful)

poet (8021) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098308)

For PostgreSQL :) http://www.postgresql.org/ [postgresql.org]

Would you like another round of ammo with that foot gun Sun?

Re:This is great news.... (5, Insightful)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098412)

I used to be one of MySQL's vociferous defenders, arguing that speed, ease of use, quality of documentation, and the size of the community made up for its limitations relative to PostgreSQL. But this is pretty much the end. Sun is clearly determined to destroy whatever's good about it. For small, lightweight projects, SQLite is the way to go, and for anything bigger, PostgreSQL is now the clear choice. I guess it's time to see if PostgreSQL's documentation and tools have managed to get any less user-hostile over the years.

The one remaining question is mindshare. For example, pretty much every ISP offers MySQL as part of a basic hosting package. No one's saying they have to stop doing that, but are they going to start offering other open source DBMSs in the same way now? I sure hope so.

Re:This is great news.... (4, Interesting)

sticks_us (150624) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098652)

I guess it's time to see if PostgreSQL's documentation and tools have managed to get any less user-hostile over the years.

I've been using PostgreSQL on-and-off for about 7 years now, and I have to say: it's *all* gotten a lot better.

In fact, feel free to check out (I think it's on Safari) how slick things have gotten, try Korry Douglas' book (forgot the title right now). I think it's a stellar example of book writing in general, and does a very good job of explaining a lot of the advanced features (like clustering, failover, etc).

I won't miss MySQL one bit--PG rules!

Re:This is great news.... (5, Informative)

Cecil (37810) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098978)

Having a good bit of experience with both, I'd say that the documentation and overall support structure for PG is about the same as MySQL these days.

The only caveat that typically hangs up new users (especially ones coming from a MySQL background) and is not particularly clearly documented is the default authentication mechanism.

By default (at least on many distributions), Postgres uses "ident" authentication, which means no password is required for database logins on a local socket. What *is* required, on the other hand, is that you must be logged in/running as the UNIX user of same name. Obviously this poses problems for webapps that want their own database user and is generally just very confusing for users who are used to the database having its own independent set of usernames and passwords (which Postgres still does, for remote connections... causing further confusion)

Of course, like any good database Postgres will be more than happy to handle its own user authentication entirely natively, you simply have to use md5 instead of ident in pg_hba.conf [google.ca]

Re:This is great news.... (5, Interesting)

rainhill (86347) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099054)

Guy n Gals.. Lets just fork the thing.., then we can call it iSQL

Re:This is great news.... (1)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098414)

Close sourcing is never good news for anyone...

Re:This is great news.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098506)

Close sourcing is never good news for anyone...
Tell that to the Chinese. We lost our manufacturing base to them. They source all of our close we wear nowadays.

Re:This is great news.... (1)

niteice (793961) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098586)

-1, terrible pun

Re:This is great news.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098762)

What more can you expect from a clothes horse?

Re:This is great news.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098850)

The Good and Great Must Ever Shun
That Reckless and Abandoned One
Who Stoops to Perpetrate a Pun

wait a minute.... (4, Interesting)

AmaDaden (794446) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099018)

I know it's all over the story on Slashdot's end but the article it self does not say anything will be closed. GPLed code can be open but cost money. Am I missing some other article? Because to me it sounds like they plan on doing things the Red Hat way. Public free version and Enterprise pay version.

Re:This is great news.... (3, Interesting)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098418)

And for Firebird (http://www.firebirdsql.org [firebirdsql.org] ) as well. :) I am going to celebrate! (Or maybe it is that Sun bought MySQL just to sweep in under the carpet so that it will not spoil their PostgreSQL interests? Probably not, but it's a funny idea nevertheless. ;-))

Re:This is great news.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098420)

Looks like I'm going to have to finally bite the bullet and play with Postgre. Was nice knowing you MySQL. (Disclaimer: I didn't rtfa, and since this is /. the summary is probably pretty sensationalist)

Re:This is great news.... (3, Informative)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098584)

Yes, it's sensationalistic. They will be close sourcing portions of the source, but not the database core itself. The only piece mentioned in TFA is the online backup utility.

I've never understood the reluctance towards PostgreSQL. It's been quite good for quite a long time now.

Re:This is great news.... (2, Insightful)

liquidpele (663430) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098672)

simply put, it's harder for a person new to databases to jump into. MySQL kinda holds your hand with phpmyadmin and it's other admin tools. PG has pgadmin (but not as featureful) and by default installs where you can't access the DB until you su as the postres user and give out permissions. Are they *trying* to make things hard??

Re:This is great news.... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098726)

Maybe it's just because I'm not your average bear... but (as a complete DB newbie) I had no trouble discovering and understanding the point of that "su postgres" step. I like the idea that the database is unusable until I say otherwise.

Re:This is great news.... (2, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098786)

Works much better than MS's famous "the default sa password is empty string".

Re:This is great news.... (1)

Achromatic1978 (916097) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099124)

2000 called, they want your old meme back. That was eight years ago, you realize?

Re:This is great news.... (1)

liquidpele (663430) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098938)

Sure it's an understandable step, but it also means you can't do any of the initial configuration with any kind of tool, which makes it *very* inconvenient if you're not big into command line.

Don't get me wrong though, I love postgres. I learned it and mysql before I graduated college. However, once in the working world I learned SQL Server, and it's tools (especially the 2005 SQL management studio) make it far more attractive because it's just plain easier to use.

Re:This is great news.... (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099016)

We are using the MS SQL enterprise manager in class (database security) and it bothers me that all this is going on and I really don't have much of a clue what it is doing. I recognize that I'm unusual in that I'd rather spend an assload of time doing it all myself with the documentation and know what is done.

Re:This is great news.... (1)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099092)

Don't get me wrong though, I love postgres. I learned it and mysql before I graduated college. However, once in the working world I learned SQL Server, and it's tools (especially the 2005 SQL management studio) make it far more attractive because it's just plain easier to use.
I was introduced to RDBMS programming (Ingres, Omnibase and later Sybase) at work about a decade before I introduced myself to PostgreSQL.

PostgreSQL lends itself well to programming. I wrote the XEmacs Lisp bindings to its pgsql programming interface. Database programming in Lisp really rocks. I don't know how they could make it any easier. A superb programming library (pgsql), conformance to standards (I always used a trade SQL book when I needed a language reference) and good performance (sometimes needing some tuning, but they had builtin tools to help you with that).

Re:This is great news.... (2, Insightful)

_KiTA_ (241027) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099026)

simply put, it's harder for a person new to databases to jump into. MySQL kinda holds your hand with phpmyadmin and it's other admin tools. PG has pgadmin (but not as featureful) and by default installs where you can't access the DB until you su as the postres user and give out permissions. Are they *trying* to make things hard??
So... if they're both open source, why not just port phpmyadmin to PG? Would it really be that hard?

Re:This is great news.... (5, Funny)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098556)

Even nicer PostreSQL has an animal mascot, I can see the jokes now: A Penguin, Indian and Elephant walk into a bar...

We even still get a pronounceable acronym LAPP. It looks like the future is still rosy for the rest of us.

Re:This is great news.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098624)

Someone really needs to make a web app, say something like a content management system or the like, called "Dance". LAPP Dance FTW!

Re:This is great news.... (5, Insightful)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098664)

For PostgreSQL :) http://www.postgresql.org/ [postgresql.org]

Would you like another round of ammo with that foot gun Sun?
From the pSQL web page:

Best of all, PostgreSQL's source code is available under the most liberal open source license: the BSD license. This license gives you the freedom to use, modify and distribute PostgreSQL in any form you like, open or closed source. Any modifications, enhancements, or changes you make are yours to do with as you please. As such, PostgreSQL is not only a powerful database system capable of running the enterprise, it is a development platform upon which to develop in-house, web, or commercial software products that require a capable RDBMS.

That seems to be the same thing Sun is saying - we're going to add some closed source features to MySQL; the same as pSQL's license allows.

Re:This is great news.... (2, Insightful)

EvilIdler (21087) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099066)

The current maintainers of Postgres still release new source to the public. Sun intends to hold back some.
I don't mind some proprietary software, but open source software which suddenly turns proprietary is
downright uncool. No MySQL on my dinky little servers; PG all the way.

Re:This is great news.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098682)

What would be interesting is if the many open source CMS/blog/forum packages start providing better support for PostgreSQL, and if more shared hosting services start offering it.

It's kind of a chicken or the egg type problem for PostgreSQL. They'll start seeing better CMS support when more hosts offer it, hosts won't offer it if more people don't use it, and more people won't use it until it gets better CMS support.

Sun and Postgres (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098970)

For PostgreSQL :) http://www.postgresql.org/ [postgresql.org]

Would you like another round of ammo with that foot gun Sun?
Um, yeah:

http://www.sun.com/software/products/postgresql/
http://www.sun.com/software/products/postgresql/support.jsp

Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck... (0, Redundant)

Chas (5144) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098316)

But this is going to seriously piss off those who've been relying on these features.

Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck (5, Informative)

andersbergh (884714) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098344)

That's not what the linked blog post says, basically what they're doing is developing new features to be put in MySQL 6.0 enterprise, and these _new_ features won't show up in community.

Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck (2, Informative)

randomnote1 (1273964) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098544)

Thank you for pointing this out. Sun is not close sourcing existing portions of MYSQL. Just adding new features for the customers who will pay an arm and a leg for it. It may not be the smartest move in scoring points with the open source community, but it gives them more leverage with their high end customers.

In the end, that is the same thing... (1)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099014)

"Sun is not close sourcing existing portions of MYSQL. Just adding new features for the customers who will pay an arm and a leg..."

In the end, that is the same thing as closed source. The development will be in the direction of helping the "Enterprise", expensive version, and eventually, after many years, that will be the only version in wide use.

Maybe Sun will change the name to "OurSQL".

Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck (1)

rainhill (86347) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099114)

well, yes but, we wanna have all that new features OPEN too.. imagine RedHat tomorrow saying, "yo guys, RH engineers gonna add new advanced features closed source.."

this is not good, not good at al...

Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck (2, Insightful)

Mrs. Grundy (680212) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098438)

It's not just going to piss off people relying on MYSQL, it should REALLY piss off the people who with a sense of open source community built it. Is this the new way for business to embrace OSS--to let all the cute little developers work on a project until it is stable and successful and then when the kids have had enough fun let the adults take over and transistion it away from OSS. This is very discouraging.

Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck (4, Insightful)

Anthony Boyd (242971) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098612)

We do get to keep what we made. If it's under the GPL, we can always fork it into a new Open Source product called OurSQL. It's just that we won't be able to integrate any of their proprietary new features that are NOT under the GPL. But, hey, who needs 'em for that? If Open Source could get it this far, odds are good Open Source can do even more.

Re:Not that I begrudge them a right to make a buck (2, Interesting)

jocknerd (29758) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098828)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think MySQL ever had an open source developer community. It was developed by a company and released as an open source product. Unlike PostgreSQL, which really is developed by a community of developers.

Close sourcing? (1, Redundant)

RedWizzard (192002) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098322)

WTF is "close sourcing"?

Re:Close sourcing? (2, Interesting)

tgatliff (311583) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098456)

As much as these "old" companies claim they understand where the industry is headed, they really have no clue....

The only thing that Sun will achieve in this change is a fork... Maybe that was the plan all along... The founders of MySQL AB get their big checks, and then create a new company with a forked version of MYSQL.. Brilliant!!! :)

Re:Close sourcing? (0)

eclectro (227083) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098458)

WTF is "close sourcing"?
It's like when your slashdot post is modded down to -1 where no one can see it.

They are forking the code (4, Informative)

spun (1352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098592)

Sun will only develop and release certain features in the Enterprise version, specifically relating to online backup, management, and other advanced features. What's in the current version stays in the current version, but they will phase out those features in the community branch. Someone can still port them from the old version, but even then, we won't get the benefit of Sun's new developments.

Re:They are forking the code (2, Informative)

Chaos Incarnate (772793) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098980)

It's not that they're phasing them out of the GPL'd branch; these are new features that were never GPL'd in the first place.

Fuck Sun (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098342)

Sun is run by a bunch of nigger jews. Is anyone really surprised by this?

You can't effectively close-source anything GPL... (0, Flamebait)

edlinfan (1131341) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098354)

...because someone with the source will fork it.

Sun appears to have made a bonehead move. Now the masses will turn somewhere else for high-quality FOSS SQL...

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (2, Insightful)

andersbergh (884714) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098372)

How could you fork code that hasn't been released in the first place?

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098526)

...because someone with the source will fork it.

Uh-huh. That's especially likely when almost every contributor to said project works for the company that sells it. Oh, wait, it's not likely at all.

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098528)

Sure, you can fork it, but almost all MySQL development is done by paid MySQL engineers (or paid InnoDB engineers). I think Google might have some engineers working on it, and I think Slashdot/VA Linux/Whatever they're called now might have had 1 at one point. The GCC/EGCS fork worked because most of the developers went with the EGCS. The XFree86/X.org fork worked because most of the developers went with the X.org. Lucid probably spent 250-500k in producing the XEmacs fork. How many other big projects have successfully forked?

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (3, Informative)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098790)

The GCC/EGCS fork worked because most of the developers went with the EGCS.
That fork worked because the GCC mainline was dead *and* the people doing all the real work were the ones who created EGCS. Indeed, what is now called "GCC" is the offspring of EGCS, the orignal GCC was killed.

No comment regarding XFree86/Xorg.

No comment regarding the Emacs/XEmacs fork, except to point out that there was an earlier fork called Epoch made in the version 18 days and that didn't go anywhere. I used it for a time in 1990 and preferred it to straight Emacs 18.

The only other major fork I can think of would be the *BSD forks, Open, Net and Free.

Successful forking is very rare and requires a truly dedicated developer community or large corporate backing to pull it off. Out of the few examples listed one of them was not a fork at all, but a coup and resulted in the death of the parent.

Can you say... (2, Funny)

TheSHAD0W (258774) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098598)

...YourSQL?

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (1)

smellotron (1039250) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098630)

Now the masses will turn somewhere else for high-quality FOSS SQL...

You mean like Postgres? (^:

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098856)

MySQL is hardly high quality.

Re:You can't effectively close-source anything GPL (1)

dfranks (180507) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098886)

Just like Firebird when Borland/Inprise close sourced Interbase.

Borland may have added features since then (I haven't even looked), but Firebird is much more useable than Interbase even was.

http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/firebird [sourceforge.net]

harsh judgement (5, Insightful)

irtza (893217) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098362)

didn't sun buy star office and give us the OPEN SOURCE - openoffice.org?

given the size and nature of this move, I don't begrudge sun anything in its commitment to open source.

Re:harsh judgement (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098712)

quiet! stop ruining my argument with facts

Re:harsh judgement (4, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098826)

And don't forget Netbeans.. Oh, and SPARC..

Whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098382)

As someone who is not advanced enough in programming, I really don't care. All I know is that a great tool has been adopted by tech company with deep pockets, which means that there will soon be cool mySQL tools, GUI interfaces, backups/replicate/security features etc.
If I can't get to the code, it really doesn't bother me.
Just keep making the product better.

Re:Whatever (1)

piojo (995934) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098724)

If I can't get to the code, it really doesn't bother me.
Just keep making the product better.
Well, the omission in that line of thinking is, what happens when they decide not to support you? What happens if they decide not to fix some bug? What if they stop releasing for your architecture? (64-bit Windows is pretty unpopular, are there binary builds for that?)

However, as other comments imply, it doesn't seem that they are actually close sourcing anything, just declaring that certain new developments will be closed.

Re:Whatever (1)

sg_oneill (159032) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098800)

As someone who is not advanced enough in programming, I really don't care. All I know is that a great tool has been adopted by tech company with deep pockets, which means that there will soon be cool mySQL tools, GUI interfaces, backups/replicate/security features etc.
If I can't get to the code, it really doesn't bother me.
Just keep making the product better.
Lets just hope you aren't dependant on an operating system thats designed around having source available to help integrate things, like, ooh say, linux.

Last part a Joke? (5, Informative)

gQuigs (913879) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098386)

OpenOffice.org - no mention eh. :P
Java - I am running the IcedTea free software version right now
OpenSolaris - might not be GPL, but it still qualifies as free software... right?

Of course I'm hoping the first part is a joke too.

Re:Last part a Joke? (2, Insightful)

davecb (6526) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098496)

No, Anonymous just has an axe to grind. MySQL is releasing some stuff in the for-pay codebase first. And I note a commentator below says the backup is in the GPL codebase after all...

--dave

Re:Last part a Joke? (5, Insightful)

junglee_iitk (651040) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098744)

That when RMS himself says that Sun is the biggest single corporate contributor to open source.

Slashdot's credibility is drowning.

Comment (5, Informative)

Rinisari (521266) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098388)

Marten replied already:

Marten Mickos Says:
April 16th, 2008 at 17:28:26

Thanks for all your comments on our business model. I wanted to present here the quick facts around this to avoid misunderstandings:

In 6.0 there will be native backup functionality in the server available for anyone and all (Community, Enterprise) under GPL.

Additionally we will develop high-end add-ons (such as encryption, native storage engine-specific drivers) that we will deliver to customers in the MySQL Enterprise product only. We have not yet decided under what licence we will release those add-ons (GPL, some other FOSS licence, and/or commercial).

Because the main backup functionality goes into the main server under GPL, anyone can of course use the api and build their own add-ons or other modifications.

Marten

Re:Comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098482)

Man, Sun fricking rocks. I love that company!
Java, netbeans, solaris etc etc
Man how could I get a job there?

Re:Comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23099096)

I'm with you on Solaris... but Java, Netbeans and MySQL are terrible.

Re:Comment (2, Informative)

Ai Olor-Wile (997427) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098656)

Sounds like the story may need a "troll" tag!

Hmmm.... (1)

Tpl2000 (1174767) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098398)

Since when could stars code?

-1, Flamebait (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098408)

Sun has had a very poor history of actually open sourcing anything.

That's rubbish. The article claiming OpenSolaris isn't really open source bases it on the lack of community and ideology. I'm sorry, but if you want ideology, then it's Free Software you're after, not open source.

OpenSolaris is definitely open source, and Sun don't have a poor history of open sourcing things. Anybody who says otherwise has an axe to grind.

Re:-1, Flamebait (1)

Rogan's Heroes (1274232) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098552)

I'm sorry, but if you want ideology, then it's Free Software you're after, not open source.
But Sun is a patron of the FSF. I guess they want ideology.

Re:-1, Flamebait (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098742)

Look at the half-assed job they did with java. It took something like 2 years after they released the code that a truly free implementation was achievable. And look at the Java stuff that isn't free. The browser plugin (which they recently came out with a new version of, IIRC), J2ME.

They also purposefully chose the license of OpenSolaris so that it wouldn't be useful to Linux.

They get to say how open source friendly they are, but it comes with strings attached. I think it would serve one well to view their initiatives with skepticism.

Re:-1, Flamebait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098940)

uuh.. J2ME is the embedded platform version, for phones and the like. Look at the half-assed job you did of researching for this post. Either that or you need to L2grammar.

Re:-1, Flamebait (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23099078)

J2ME is the embedded platform version, for phones and the like.
I know that. I've written code for J2ME. Perhaps you think I meant J2EE? I've never used that so I don't know anything about what it may be licensed with.

I think you need to be careful about making assumptions about the amount of research I've done. I'm making this post because I've seen the consequences of this in practical terms.

-1, Flamebait NOT: Prod Solaris is NOT opensource. (1)

gd23ka (324741) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098810)

Actually it's true. So I can get the OpenSolaris sources... yay! Great. But what I really need is the
sources to the Solaris I'm actually running. So no, it's not really open source because we're not running here
some eternal Beta like OpenSolaris but production Solaris. I want the exact source that reflects the
patch level on the system. Where can I get that?!

Re:-1, Flamebait NOT: Prod Solaris is NOT opensour (4, Insightful)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099116)

THere's an appropriate saying about getting free donuts and complaining about the holes...

look at the time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098430)

its time to fork...

What the hell? (5, Informative)

joe_bruin (266648) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098486)

Sun has had a very poor history of actually open sourcing anything
Yes, let's forget about Java, that was recently GPL'd. Or Open Solaris, including ZFS. Or Open Office. Or OpenSPARC (you can download and implement their latest processors). Or Netbeans (and Forte before that, though it was lousy). Or being a patron of the FSF [fsf.org] .

Those guys are such dicks, they never give the community anything.

Re:What the hell? (1)

jgardner100 (559892) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098766)

or OpenWindows, NFS, Glassfish etc. That would mean they had a history of Open Sourcing dating back more than ten years.

Guess it's not really MySQL any more. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098502)

Maybe it should be renamed Sun'sSQL.

Sun to Begin Close Sourcing MySQL (5, Funny)

brianc (11901) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098508)

Oh, no they don't. They can't do that to MySQL.

They can do it to TheirSQL, but not MySQL...

Re: Sun to Begin Close Sourcing MySQL (1)

teslatug (543527) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098746)

Time for a fork, OurSQL

Comments from MySQL (5, Informative)

martenmickos (467191) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098626)

Thanks for all the comments on this. We are listening attentively. Let me clarify some facts:

* The business decision on this was made by MySQL AB (by me as the then CEO) prior to the acquisition by Sun, so this has nothing to do with Sun. On the contrary, Sun is more likely to influence this decision the other way.

* It is not a quesiton of close sourcing any existing code, nor anything in the core server. Everything we have released under GPL continues to be under GPL, and the core server will always be under GPL (or some other FOSS licence).

* We will introduce backup functionality for all users (Community and Enterprise) under GPL in version 6.0.

* Additionally we will develop high-end add-ons (such as encryption, native storage engine-specific drivers) that we will deliver to customers in the MySQL Enterprise product only. We have not yet decided under what licence we will release those add-ons (GPL, some other FOSS licence, and/or commercial).

* At all times, because the main backup functionality goes into the core server under GPL, anyone can of course use the api and build their own add-ons or other modifications.

Those are the facts on this. The interesting topic is of course the one of the business model and what the best business model for FOSS software is. I hope to cover that in a separate posting.

In all of this, you have our undivided continued commitment to providing a fantastic and complete MySQL server under GPL for anyone to download and use. If we for whatever reason would not do that, we would risk losing users to other open source databases or risk seeing a fork of our own product. This is the power of open source.

Make sense?

Marten
previously CEO of MySQL, now SVP at Sun

Re:Comments from MySQL (2, Insightful)

Chandon Seldon (43083) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098690)

Thanks for posting and clarifying.

That seems to be basically what the article says too. I wonder if Slashdot editors actually read stories before posting them with flamebait summaries?

Re:Comments from MySQL (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098692)

You are a filthy, money grubbing jew piece of shit. Go burn in hell, you nigger dick sucking faggot.

Re:Comments from MySQL (5, Insightful)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098702)

If this is true, could the editors please alter the article title accordingly? Or at least point directly to the above comment? These articles get indexed.

Re:Comments from MySQL (2, Interesting)

AmyRose1024 (1160863) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098802)

I think the article was supposed to scare people. I know some people on /. have a tendency to "stretch the truth" to scare people.

Re:Comments from MySQL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098822)

Most of these stories wouldn't get read if it wasn't for the sensationalist titles.

Re:Comments from MySQL (-1, Troll)

Ice Station Zebra (18124) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098944)

May I be the first to say how great I think postgres is and how shitty I think mysql is. I've been using sql dbs since 1990 and yours is by far the worst of the bunch.

Best not to worry about forking (0, Flamebait)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098678)

I like MySQL, I have no real issues with it. But if it's going closed source, I say let it be. Time to put energy behind Postgresql

Noooo!! (MySQL 1995-2008) (0, Flamebait)

Bushido Hacks (788211) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098778)

MySQL was outstanding. At least in my opinion. Where Oracle took 2 GB of space to download then had to be burned to a CD, MySQL was a lightweight, straight-forward relational database managment system.

Closing off MySQL will have serious consequences for PHP and C developers since SUN will rewrite the entire MySQL API strictly in Java.

Perhaps now would be a good time to migrate to PostgreSQL [postgresql.org] .

Goodbye MySQL. :-(

Re:Noooo!! (MySQL 1995-2008) (1)

autocracy (192714) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098904)

What hat did you pull those ideas out of?

Re:Noooo!! (MySQL 1995-2008) (1)

Samah (729132) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099062)

> Where Oracle took 2 GB of space to download then had to be burned to a CD, MySQL was a lightweight, straight-forward relational database managment system.
You've nailed it right there--MySQL is lightweight and straight-forward. You seem to be neglecting the fact that Oracle is not intended to be lightweight. Its enormous feature set and bulk requires a lot of configuration and thus generally requires an experienced Oracle DBA to manage it.
I'm not disagreeing with you re: MySQL, just that I think your comparison is a little unfair in this case. If you don't need any of the things Oracle has that MySQL doesn't (yet), MySQL is obviously your best choice. Sorry I can't comment on PostgreSQL as I've never used it (might do so soon though).

Disclosure: I use Oracle every day at work; I only use MySQL for home projects.

What? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098814)

Huh? WTF? Wait... how the fuck did I miss that? Fucking fuckity frick frack fuckk

Sun owns mysql??? Where were the air raid warning sirens? Who cares what they do with the source, nothing good will come from this. Java.. phffffft.

Seriously where have I been that I missed the great Scandinavian sell out. This is like that time Yoko met John. All down hill fromnow on...

MySQL & FOSS (5, Insightful)

martenmickos (467191) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098824)

All,

I tried to clarify the facts in another posting a moment ago: http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=525246&cid=23098626

Here I will discuss the business model considerations, MySQL's commitment to Free and Open Source Software (FOSS), and why we made the decision we made.

First and foremost: we at MySQL firmly believe that open source is a superior way of producing software. You get better quality faster, and you often get better innovation too.

So it is not lightly that we have decided a few times to produce non-open software, such as the MySQL Monitor introduced some years ago. So why do we do that?

The reason is that we have an ambition not only to produce FOSS code, but also to be a profitable business that can exist for a long time. Each time we make more money, we hire more developers to develop GPL code.

If the world were perfect, we would only produce GPL code and we would have a great business that cna fund the software development. But we have found that the world is not perfect. We have been experimenting with a variety of business models around FOSS (dual licensing, support only, simple subscriptions, different binaries for community and enterprise, non-open source features) to find the best one. And we will continue to experiment until we are satisfied. We need to find a model that allows us to produce a ton of great code under GPL while having the financial strength to do all this.

To get to this goal of ours, we believe we have to be more pragmatic than dogmatic. Call it a necessary evil if you like. Having production add-ons that we provide only to paying customers currently seems to use to be a useful model. Our partners and customers think it is great. Many users think it is great. But not all do (as evident from this thread on /.). I would hope we could please all, but I am afraid we cannot.

In all of this - i.e. as we experiment with open source business models (as there aren't really any role models bigger than ourselves that we could learn from) - we remain fully committed to producing the core database server always under the GPL (or some other approved FOSS licence).

In this work, we feel we have been able to produce enormous benefits to the world in the form of GPL software. The MySQL server could not have evolved as much as it did (not that I am saying it has evolved perfectly) if we hadn't had a revenue stream to fund the hiring of developers and others. We have open sourced MySQL Cluster which was an advanced closed-source database engine at Ericsson. We open sourced the Falcon storage engine.

I can appreciate that many of you are upset with our decisions. It has happened before that the community has been upset with us. But I hope that you can see that

* we are trying to be fully open and transparent with our decision-making in these areas

* we have a full commitment to produce the core MySQL server under GPL

* we are actively listening to your input

We can probably not please all, but you should know that we are trying to serve our community. We are immensely thankful for all the support and contributions that we have received in our 13-year history. We are hoping that we are good stewards of the MySQL phenomenon, and we hope that you can come to terms with the fact that we find revenue generation a vital part of our mission.

We may not have come up with the perfect business model yet (and perhaps the decision that is here being debated was utterly stupid), but we are determined to continue to seek the perfect business model for open source software so that we can continue to exist and be strong, and so that other software entrepreneurs can learn from our successes and mistakes.

Finally, please note that this entire decision and reasoning is something we developed on our own at MySQL AB several months ago, before being acquired by Sun. Sun has not asked us to do this or that. Or in fact, Sun has asked us the opposite - i.e. whether we should not just opensource all the stuff relating to backup. I will have such a discussion with my colleagues at Sun in the coming months.

Thanks for listening, and please let me know if you have figured out a better business model for us!

Marten
formerly CEO of MySQL AB, now SVP at Sun

P.S. Pardon any typos. I had little time to review.

Re:MySQL & FOSS (1)

GumphMaster (772693) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099008)

Thank you for taking the time to explain the MySQL AB rationale. Perfectly sane to my eyes.

GPL facts (1)

WarJolt (990309) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098830)

With Oracle owning Innodb, and it being GPL, does this mean that MySQL will be removing it to introduce these features?
The article only mentioned backup features. Maybe there is more features, but for MySQL online backups can be accomplished by daemons that aren't linked to MySQL in any way. GPL'ed and non-GPL'ed applications can legally communicate through pipes or sockets.

Is anyone actually reading TFA? (5, Insightful)

FliesLikeABrick (943848) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098842)

Looking at the actual link, this is talking about select _new_ features. The /. summary clearly is trying to scare us all into thinking that existing parts of MySQL would somehow be turned into a closed-source product.

Talk about someone trying to be misleading...

Slasdot: useless. Commenters: the REAL story. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23098864)

I love how you can basically nowadays RELY UPON Slashdot to frame tech issues incorrectly, specifically with a sensationalist bent. If you want to get the REAL story, and not just the jazzed-up headline, you have to read the comments and find out where the editors lied.

Re:Slasdot: useless. Commenters: the REAL story. (3, Interesting)

MrGHemp (189288) | more than 6 years ago | (#23099028)

I agree... it seems the headlines and articles have been getting things wrong more often lately... it seemed like the reviewer who posted the story would at least add to the post if they thought part of it was incorrect or misleading... but that doesn't seem to happen as often anymore... I hope /. editors start correcting this, because if the stories become more and more inaccurate... we won't be able to trust /. as a reliable source of tech news. And once ppl don't trust the source, well it's game over.

67comet (1)

67comet (758494) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098894)

Friggin' "A" I've only "just" gotten comfy with MySQL. Time to start changing my server over to another application for my database needs. I have no issues with Java, since they didn't start open I don't expect much from them when they say they are "opening" things up, but taking a previously open application and closing parts off? No thank you, I'll find something else. What a shame, Justin

mrghemp (5, Insightful)

MrGHemp (189288) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098928)

The title of this article is a bit dramatic and incorrect. There is nothing in the story about the core MySQL engine being moved from open source to a closed source mentioned in the story. Rather a fancy new backup add-on is being released to Enterprise edition, and possibly added to the community version later.

MySQL is one of the most popular open source products out there, but they get lambasted if they create an add-on and want to actually get paid for it. Too many ppl react as if they are defecating on a holy shrine in the land of FOSS.

The title of this article and some of the reactions here strikes me a chicken little "the sky is falling" BS. I love open source software and the general movement, but I hate it when people jump to conclusions like this... and jumping to conclusions like this seems to happen all to often by ppl on /. and the open source community in general. I'd like to see more people showing respect for a company that has done so much for open source and respect the fact that they deserve to actually make a little money along the way.

I can't help but wonder how many of the people, who treat this story like the evil Sun is going ruin MySQL, run MySQL but haven't open sourced the programs that they've written that access the database... I'd bet a hell of a lot of closed source programs use MySQL as their database... should we scream at them for being evil too?

And now it begins... (1)

bgibby9 (614547) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098936)

Sorry to sound pessimistic but doesn't look too good for the future of MySQL. MySQL has always been an honest, what's best for the people kind of company in my eyes, and regardless of what really is happening, the end result of this is that my idea of MySQL has changed. This is something that other people will also feel so in any light, regardless of the outcome, doubt will now be part of people's minds when it comes to MySQL. Sorry guys!

open source as a lock-in hook ? (2, Interesting)

cats-paw (34890) | more than 6 years ago | (#23098966)

It occurs to me that buying an open source software company might be a sneaky way to get some good, old fashioned customer lock-in.

Look for free software program, preferably complicated, with a large user base.

Close it, and begin charging.

It seems as though you could get customers to stick around with the right price point. Now you may begin your ad infinitum licensing fees.

I'm not saying that's what's happening in this case, but it seems like something to evaluate. The two flaws in this idea:

The customers migrate to another free software tool - which might be difficult to do.
The program forks.

Seems to minimize risk a high percentage of the userbase would pay as the path of least resistance.

The fact that the buyers could get to this point on the (free) contributions of the original authors is kind of annoying.

Your probably still better off having used free software in the first place.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...