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!

MySQL and SCO Join Forces

ScuttleMonkey posted about 9 years ago | from the black-and-white-meets-gray dept.

Businesses 516

matchboy writes "CNET is reporting that MySQL and SCO have signed a partnership to work on "joint certification, marketing, sales, training and business development work for a version of the database for SCO's new OpenServer 6 version of Unix." Why would MySQL decide to work directly with a company that has deemed the GPL as unconstitutional?"

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

It's simple (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477791)

They kidnapped their dolphin Sekila and left a note that said "You know what's great with tuna? Dolphin."

Because... (5, Insightful)

pwnage (856708) | about 9 years ago | (#13477795)

Dollars always trumps the Constitution. Haven't you been paying attention to recent politics?

Maybe... (5, Insightful)

GreyWolf3000 (468618) | about 9 years ago | (#13477801)

Why would MySQL decide to work directly with a company that has deemed the GPL as unconstitutional?"

...because MySQL stands to make money off of this?

I dunno...just a guess.

doubtful (5, Insightful) (807087) | about 9 years ago | (#13477840)

they risk a large-scale negative reaction in order to attempt a push into a small, dying market niche.

as i have pointed out on groklaw, the companies running dbms on their unixware/openserver boxes will likely stick with their dbms when they move to another *nix.

companies hate switching dbms because it can get very messy very fast.

Re:doubtful (5, Informative)

trewornan (608722) | about 9 years ago | (#13477909)

SCO have a history of taking legal actions against those that enter into contracts with them. In fact just about everybody they sue has some sort of contract with them. MySQL ab are taking a real chance with this and it could cost them hugely.

Re:doubtful (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13478066)

..In fact just about everybody they sue has some sort of contract with them.
This is Jack's utter disbelief.

Thank you, Capt. Obvious. Your grasp of the subtleties of law are truly astounding.

Yes, companies will indeed sue other companies when there is a breach of contract involved (real or imagined.) Other reasons are libel, slander, recovery of damages resulting from the commission of a crime or violation of the law, things like that.

Re:doubtful (1)

An Onerous Coward (222037) | about 9 years ago | (#13478072)

Well, you know the old saying: You lie down with the dogs, you wake up with a mailbox full of litigation.

I like MySQL, both as a product and as a company. They've generally done the right things, thus far. I just hope they're being careful, and I hope they understand just how silly this looks to us all. :)

That's the one thing that won't happen (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13478083)

SCO is going to be driven into bankruptcy shortly after Sept.12 when Judge Kimbal puts all their liquid assets into a trust to be available to pay the license fees they owe Novell.

SCO is in no position to start any new legal actions.

On the other hand, IBM or Novell will end up owning the assets of SCO but they probably won't hold enough of a grudge to pursue MySQL for anything.

Re:Maybe... (5, Funny)

ralinx (305484) | about 9 years ago | (#13477865)

...because MySQL stands to make money off of this?

yea, just think of all that potential revenue coming from those millions of SCO customers ;)

Re:Maybe... (4, Funny)

Solder Fumes (797270) | about 9 years ago | (#13477880)

Because it's TheirSQL.

Maybe they're ROMulans? (1)

bAdministrator (815570) | about 9 years ago | (#13477924)

"Help! I can't learn. I'm a ROMulan..."

Re:Maybe... (4, Insightful)

IdleTime (561841) | about 9 years ago | (#13477937)

If the MySQL people think they are going to make money by partnering with SCO, they need a new leadership.

The judgment behind this decision says a lot about the company and I woukld never touch its products, no matter how good they are supposed to be.

IMHO making a partnership with SCO is a career killer.

me: I see you were CEO of MySQL?
CEO: yes
me: And you were the force behind the partnering deal with SCO?
CEO: Yes
me: Thank you for your interest in the position, but we don't need CEO's with flawed busniess logic. Next!

MySQL may be next target of SCO lawsuit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477967)

MySQL in their greed has forgotten the lesson of the past (what happened to IBM).

This is what happens when you sign a deal with the devil. In a few years no doubt, MySQL will supposedly have "tainted" code in it.

SCO is hoping MySQL gets famous so they can do another of these Linux fud lawsuits and hopefully get some cash out of it.

Re:MySQL may be next target of SCO lawsuit (2, Interesting)

WilliamSChips (793741) | about 9 years ago | (#13477997)

They won't be able to do another Linux FUD lawsuit. Novell is suing them for more than they're worth. Now let's just hope that they win...

Re:Maybe... (4, Informative)

Dogtanian (588974) | about 9 years ago | (#13478060)

...because MySQL stands to make money off of this?

Not if Novell have anything to do with it [] .

(Not my comment, but I thought it was a pity to let something that insightful languish at +2 obscurity because it didn't appear near the start).

mysql ab should have spoken with ev1 (1, Insightful) (807087) | about 9 years ago | (#13477810)

before they made this ill-conceived strategic decision.

Postgres (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477814)

Just use Postgres dude!

I'll tell you why... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477817)

The same reason they wouldn't let put MySQL (officially) in Solaris 10. Sun had to hide it. Because MySQL are a bunch of devious, canniving, dishonest bastards, that's why.

Use PostgreSQL. It's miles better anyway.

MySQL Business Strategy (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477819)

1 - Load gun
2 - Point gun at foot
3 - Pull trigger

Re:MySQL Business Strategy (2, Insightful)

Legendof_Pedro (900265) | about 9 years ago | (#13477962)

4 - Profit


This could be a good thing (2, Insightful)

djfatbody (140917) | about 9 years ago | (#13477822)

I will play the optimist and say that this may help the cause. Clearly SCO is on the ropes. MySQL way be the olive branch that allows SCO to exit all this and save a little face. MySQL get a platform with which to grow market share against other commercial databases.

Re:This could be a good thing (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 9 years ago | (#13477991)

And saving face is a good thing? I thought everyone here wanted to see SCO go down in flames...

Judging one by the company he keeps (4, Insightful)

MarkEst1973 (769601) | about 9 years ago | (#13477824)

You can tell a lot about a person by looking at the people (s)he associates with.

Why, oh, why would MySql risk their reputation knowing how SCO looks to the entire open source community?

Re:Judging one by the company he keeps (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477969)

But SCO is giving credibility to GPL software, something that they were against before. Surely this is more of a win for the open source community than SCO? Put simply: SCO is struggling to make their applications viable, and in doing so, require OSS. They finally realize why they need us.

Re:Judging one by the company he keeps (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | about 9 years ago | (#13477992)

But SCO is giving credibility to GPL software

How are the same people who called the GPL 'unconstitutional' going to lend it credibility, even if they were a credible business in the first place, and not a dying company reliant on income from their existing customers (or from *suing* their existing customers)?

Please stop hogging the crack pipe.

Re:Judging one by the company he keeps (4, Insightful)

njcoder (657816) | about 9 years ago | (#13478032)

"Why, oh, why would MySql risk their reputation knowing how SCO looks to the entire open source community?"

Maybe it's the open source community that needs to really look at some of the things that MySQL ab has done in the past and really think if that reputation is warranted, especially after this.

It's one thing to like and use the product it's another to like and trust the company that is backing it. All too often people have one opinion and assume the other. This also work dislike and distrust.

New Playing Field (4, Insightful)

cloudscout (104011) | about 9 years ago | (#13477825)

I imagine nobody is happier to hear this that PostgreSQL [] . Their popularity is about to skyrocket as countless OSS projects look for alternatives to MySQL.

Re:New Playing Field (0, Redundant)

rheotaxis (528103) | about 9 years ago | (#13478037)

3 Cheers for PostgreSQL!

One question? (1)

oogoliegoogolie (635356) | about 9 years ago | (#13478049)

How do you pronounce PostgreSQL?

Not trying to be funny or lame here, I seriously want to know how to say the bloody thing.

Re:One question? (2, Informative)

farnz (625056) | about 9 years ago | (#13478062)

As the devs often seem to abbreviate it to "Postgres", which I'd pronounce "Post-gres", I pronounce it as "Post-gres-Q-L".

Uh - Best of Both Worlds? (5, Interesting)

mosel-saar-ruwer (732341) | about 9 years ago | (#13477829)

Why would MySQL decide to work directly with a company that has deemed the GPL as unconstitutional?

Maybe because MySQL doesn't have a dog in this fight?

MySQL 4.1 Downloads

The software available in MySQL Network and the MySQL Community Edition is available under the "dual licensing" model. Under this model, users may choose to use MySQL products under the free software/open source GNU General Public License (commonly known as the "GPL") or under a commercial license. []

Re:Uh - Best of Both Worlds? (4, Interesting)

skillet-thief (622320) | about 9 years ago | (#13477995)

The mysql dual licence was actually hiding a deeper schizophrenia that has just now showed itself. Apparently, they never believed they could really make enough money with GPL'ed software, so now they are doing this.

I'm not sure what the moral of the story might be yet, but quite possibly it is: Beware of what lurks behind the dual licence.

Just use PostgreSQL... (0, Offtopic)

DAldredge (2353) | about 9 years ago | (#13477830)

Just use PostgreSQL and everyone will be happier. []

PostgreSQL is a powerful, open source relational database system. It has more than 15 years of active development and a proven architecture that has earned it a strong reputation for reliability, data integrity, and correctness. It runs on all major operating systems, including Linux, UNIX (AIX, BSD, HP-UX, SGI IRIX, Mac OS X, Solaris, SunOS, Tru64), BeOS, and Windows. It is fully ACID compliant, has full support for foreign keys, joins, views, triggers, and stored procedures (in multiple languages). It includes most SQL92 and SQL99 data types, including INTEGER, NUMERIC, BOOLEAN, CHAR, VARCHAR, DATE, INTERVAL, and TIMESTAMP. It also supports storage of binary large objects, including pictures, sounds, or video. It has native programming interfaces for C/C++, Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, Tcl, ODBC, among others, and exceptional documentation.

An enterprise class database, PostgreSQL boasts sophisticated features such as the Multi-Version Concurrency Control (MVCC), point in time recovery, tablespaces, asynchronous replication, nested transactions (savepoints), online/hot backups, a sophisticated query planner/optimizer, and write ahead log for fault tolerance. It supports international character sets, multibyte character encodings, Unicode, and in is locale-aware for sorting, case-sensitivity, and formatting. It is highly scalable both in sheer quantity of data it can manage and and in the number of concurrent users it can accommodate. There are active PostgreSQL systems in production environments that manage in excess of 4 terabytes of data. Some general PostgreSQL limits are included in the table below.
Limit Value
Maximum Database Size Unlimited
Maximum Table Size 32 TB
Maximum Row Size 1.6 TB
Maximum Field Size 1 GB
Maximum Rows per Table Unlimited
Maximum Columns per Table 250 - 1600 depending on column types
Maximum Indexes per Table Unlimited

PostgreSQL has won praise from it's users and industry recognition, including the Linux New Media Award for Best Database System and three time winner of the The Linux Journal Editors' Choice Award for best DBMS.
Featureful and Standards Compliant

PostgreSQL prides itself in standards compliance. Its SQL implementation strongly conforms to the ANSI-SQL 92/99 standards. It has full support for subqueries (including subselects in the FROM clause), read-committed and serializable transaction isolation levels. And while PostgreSQL has a fully relational system catalog which itself supports multiple schemas per database, its catalog is also accessible through the Information Schema as defined in the SQL standard.

Data integrity features include (compound) primary keys, foreign keys with restricting and cascading updates/deletes, check constraints, unique constraints, and not null constraints, all of which are deferrable.

It also has a host of extensions and advanced features. Among the conveniences are auto-increment columns through sequences, and LIMIT/OFFSET allowing the return of partial result sets. PostgreSQL supports compound, unique, partial, and functional indexes which can use any of its B-tree, R-tree, hash, or GiST storage methods.

GiST (Generalized Search Tree) indexing is an advanced system which brings together a wide array of different sorting and searching algorithms including B-tree, B+-tree, R-tree, partial sum trees, ranked B+-trees and many others. It also provides an interface which allows both the creation of custom data types as well as extensible query methods with which to search them. Thus, GiST offers the flexibility to specify what you store, how you store it, and the ability to define new ways to search through it --- ways that far exceed those offered by standard B-tree, R-tree and other generalized search algorithms.

GiST serves as a foundation for many public projects that use PostgreSQL such as OpenFTS and PostGIS. OpenFTS (Open Source Full Text Search engine) provides online indexing of data and relevance ranking for database searching. PostGIS is a project which adds support for geographic objects in PostgreSQL, allowing it to be used as a spatial database for geographic information systems (GIS), much like ESRI's SDE or Oracle's Spatial extension.

Other advanced features include table inheritance, a rules systems, and database events. Table inheritance puts an object oriented slant on table creation, allowing database designers to derive new tables from other tables, treating them as base classes. Even better, PostgreSQL supports both single and multiple inheritance in this manner.

The rules system, also called the query rewrite system, allows the database designer to create rules which identify specific operations for a given table or view, and dynamically transform them into alternate operations when they are processed.

The events system is an interprocess communication system in which messages and events can be transmitted between clients using the LISTEN and NOTIFY commands, allowing both simple peer to peer communication and advanced coordination on database events. Since notifications can be issued from triggers and stored procedures, PostgreSQL clients can monitor database events such as table updates, inserts, or deletes as they happen.
Highly Customizable

PostgreSQL runs stored procedures in more than a dozen programming languages, including Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, Tcl, C/C++, and its own PL/pgSQL, which is similar to Oracle's PL/SQL. Included with its standard function library are hundreds of built-in functions that range from basic math and string operations to cryptography and Oracle compatibility. Triggers and stored procedures can be written in C and loaded into the database as a library, allowing great flexibility in extending its capabilities. Similarly, PostgreSQL includes a framework that allows developers to define and create their own custom data types along with supporting functions and operators that define their behavior. As a result, a host of advanced data types have been created that range from geometric and spatial primitives to network addresses to even ISBN/ISSN (International Standard Book Number/International Standard Serial Number) data types, all of which can be optionally added to the system.

Just as there are many procedure languages supported by PostgreSQL, there are also many library interfaces as well, allowing various languages both compiled and interpreted to interface with PostgreSQL. There are interfaces for Java (JDBC), ODBC, Perl, Python, Ruby, C, C++, PHP, Lisp, Scheme, and Qt just to name a few.

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.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (1, Troll)

Omnifarious (11933) | about 9 years ago | (#13477899)

This is a cut & paste of a piece of advertisement and marketing fluff. I don't care how good PostresSQL is, if it has people like you behind it I want no part of it.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (3, Insightful)

trewornan (608722) | about 9 years ago | (#13477947)

The GP is a muppet but I doubt he's got much to do with PostgreSQL. In my experience they're a nice enought bunch and Postgres is a good product, don't let one idiot put you off.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (2, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | about 9 years ago | (#13477970)

Would it have been better to have cost the PostgreSQL project money by just posting a link? It isn't like they are a for profit org that has money to spare.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (1)

trewornan (608722) | about 9 years ago | (#13478082)

OK I may have been a bit harsh . . . apologies.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (1)

DAldredge (2353) | about 9 years ago | (#13477955)

Forgive me for posting information about a free open source database in a discussion of databases on a site that runs stories on open source and databases.

And if a simple posting on a site stops you from using a product,well, you were never qualified to make such a decision in the first place.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (3, Funny)

jadavis (473492) | about 9 years ago | (#13478029)

I don't care how good PostresSQL is, if it has people like you behind it I want no part of it.

Judging by the number of people who use that argument against PostgreSQL, I wouldn't be surprised at all if he were behind MySQL.

Heck, if MySQL's PR dept. can't come up with other compelling arguments, they might as well try reverse psychology.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477900)

+4 informative?

It's off topic *and* a cut'n paste job from a propaganda flyer...

slashdot at its finest.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (1)

malabar-fraise (637726) | about 9 years ago | (#13477952)

Nah, it's your current -1 score (but it may change) that make me think "slashdot at its finest" :)

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (4, Informative)

VGPowerlord (621254) | about 9 years ago | (#13477904)

Incidently, PostgreSQL also conforms to most of the SQL 2003 standard as well.

Re:Just use PostgreSQL... (1)

malabar-fraise (637726) | about 9 years ago | (#13477917)

I definitly love PostgreSQL, I use it in nearly all my projects. But even if I don't like MySQL as much as PostgreSQL, I'm pretty concerned on why a well known OSS contributor is now a partner of an open source foe.

Karma Whoredar Activated (-1, Redundant)

nmb3000 (741169) | about 9 years ago | (#13477951)

*cough*, karma whore, *cough* *cough*

Seriously, mod parent down.

Re:Karma Whoredar Activated (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477988)

Dude, check out his 4-digit user number. Somehow I doubt karma was really his point.

Yet another reason to not use MySQL (-1, Redundant)

nxtw (866177) | about 9 years ago | (#13477834)

Despite MySQL's numerous flaws and drawbacks compared to other open source and commerical databases, it has still remained popular. This is simply another reason to use a superior product, such as PostgreSQL.

Re:Yet another reason to not use MySQL (1)

drgonzo59 (747139) | about 9 years ago | (#13478047)

I wanted to use PostgreSQL for my project but the libraries to interface with the language weren't there yet (some in beta some in alpha). MySQL simply has more language libraries then PostgreSQL. It is a vicious circle. The more libraries, the more popular, the more popular - the more libraries for it...

Letters to MySQL owners (0, Flamebait)

ErikPeterson (912282) | about 9 years ago | (#13477835)

How long until everyone who was ever used or submitted to a db that runs MySQL gets a letter asking for money or having a lawsuit on their hands for using SCO software ;)

Join? (5, Funny)

Mr.Progressive (812475) | about 9 years ago | (#13477836)

SELECT * FROM mysql, sco WHERE mysql_forces = sco_forces

i wish i had mod points (1) (807087) | about 9 years ago | (#13477884)

that was funny. thanks for the laugh =)

Re:Join? (1)

Tethys_was_taken (813654) | about 9 years ago | (#13477928)

Funniest thing I've read in a long time. I wish I had mod points, but I just blew 'em away :(

PS: If this is true, and the deal goes through completely, I will be switching my website over to Postgres. Thanks for all the fish MySQL AB. It was (somewhat) good while it lasted.

Followed By (5, Funny)

ravenspear (756059) | about 9 years ago | (#13478061)

UPDATE companytypes SET mysql = 'justgotworse', sco = 'wasalreadyshitty' WHERE mysql_forces = sco_forces;

right (5, Insightful)

mr_tommy (619972) | about 9 years ago | (#13477841)

Who cares? MySQL is one of the few open source companies that seems to be making the headlines doing business in the real world! Good for them!

Re:right (1)

Tethys_was_taken (813654) | about 9 years ago | (#13477975)

FOSS companies get a lot of their business from the goodwill of their users. e.g. See: Wikipedia. A large number of SCO's endusers are part-time web developers, and amateur coders who have an OpenSource streak. Teaming up with SCO, a well-known anti-FOSS company that also happens to be MS's puppet is a statement. A statement that their users aren't the most important thing to them anymore. This isn't exactly the best way to foster goodwill.

Re:right (2, Insightful)

Tethys_was_taken (813654) | about 9 years ago | (#13477985)

Goddamn it. Ignore the parent post. I meant to post this:

FOSS companies get a lot of their business from the goodwill of their users. e.g. See: Wikipedia.

A large number of MySQLAB's endusers are part-time web developers, and amateur coders who have an OpenSource streak.

Teaming up with SCO, a well-known anti-FOSS company that also happens to be MS's puppet is a statement. A statement that their users aren't the most important thing to them anymore. This isn't exactly the best way to foster goodwill.

Re:right (1)

unixbugs (654234) | about 9 years ago | (#13478017)

What you said may be true but after reading this crap I have a new project due next week:

To move it all to PGSQL []

The last thing I need is for SCO to come knocking saying their code is in my damn database. It was bad enough that they tried to steal my OS, now the data on top it isn't even safe.

So I'm being speculative if not pretentious but that doesn't change the fact that I'm serious about migration. I'm getting out while MySQL is still portable to PG [] .

Time for change! (0, Redundant)

slashname3 (739398) | about 9 years ago | (#13477847)

Looks like it is time to convert all those mysql databases to postgresql before mysql starts it's baseless lawsuits similar to SCO's.

Shame to see a good application tie an anchor to itself.

Re:Time for change! (4, Insightful)

demachina (71715) | about 9 years ago | (#13477971)

" before mysql starts it's baseless lawsuits similar to SCO's."

This is silly sensationalism. Its was probably ill advised on MySQL's part to sign a partnership with SCO at this point, but the chances this has anything to do with SCO's legal insanity against Linux are about zero. MySQL probably just had some money thrown their way to do integration work on SCO's product which lots of people still use and rely on. That product and the people working on it, unfortunate as they are, have little to do with the insanity of Darl McBride and his Linux witch hunt.

MySQL being a for profit organization they probably just wanted the business.

Chances are they will regret it because they will probably lose more users and customers than they will gain from the deal with SCO.

Why? (1)

Call Me Black Cloud (616282) | about 9 years ago | (#13477851)

Because business arrangements typically are more profitable than releasing software under the GPL, even if you sell support agreements.

Because they're a business (1)

legality (702336) | about 9 years ago | (#13477853)

If they see money, they're going to go for it. Morals carry you so far, then there's the power of the almighty dollar.

Some would sell their mothers for money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477854)

What a discusting sell out.
You can hardly see any decency left in this world.
New Orleans was great example how people really are under their everyday's masks.

Re:Some would sell their mothers for money... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477911)

Something, somewhere in the part of my brain that I call a conscience, a small warning sound is going off saying "Looting and raping != Associating with a company the /. crowd hates".
I dunno, maybe its just me.

Birds of a feather? (-1, Redundant)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | about 9 years ago | (#13477856)

An incomplete and non-compliant database with an incomplete and non-compliant OS... I mean, both are usable and even useful products, but there are more complete and more compliant alternatives out there.

Bizarro World? (2, Insightful)

RealisticCanadian (850967) | about 9 years ago | (#13477857)

Up is down, down is up! The world doesn't make any sense anymore!

Oh, wait, a business organization more interested in making money than in the 'values' it touts.... who'da thunk?

Re:Bizarro World? (1)

ultranova (717540) | about 9 years ago | (#13477989)

Up is down, down is up! The world doesn't make any sense anymore!

Oh, wait, a business organization more interested in making money than in the 'values' it touts.... who'da thunk?

It is precisely that MySQL is interested in making money that makes this such a strange move. SCO is going to go down. Even if they won't go banckrupt in the legal battle, there is no way they can ever recover their credibility, and the company is likely doomed, as is their product. What does MySQL stand to gain from this, except guilt by association ?

Something strange is going on here...

i will tell you why (1)

jmazzi (869663) | about 9 years ago | (#13477866)

SCO is seeing if they can find some STOLEN CODE in MySQL.

Re:i will tell you why (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | about 9 years ago | (#13478015)

SCO is seeing if they can find some STOLEN CODE in MySQL

Thought the whole point about open source was that anyone could examine the code without having to enter into some tangentially-related business arrangement? Guess I was wrong.

OK, Seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477867)

Who in their right mind is doing business with SCO? Are there companies out there having meetings where someone says, "I know, we shouldn't work with Red Hat or Sun, no we need a vendor we can trust, we should use SCO!" ?

If I said that at work people would laugh, and if I said I was serious they would probably kick me out of the meeting...

heh (1)

rakslice (90330) | about 9 years ago | (#13477869)

Someone at SCO realized that they're actually going to be needing to sell some products at some point in the future.

And although being able to attach little "designed for MySQL" stickers to the box won't cut through SCO's pariah status in the Linux community, they can always flip open the "Copyright Protection Racket Subscribers List" folder if they need some chumps to direct market to.

No more MySQL for me (0, Redundant)

WhiteWolf666 (145211) | about 9 years ago | (#13477874)

You can tell a lot about a company by the company it keeps.

If someone does initiates new business with SCO, I'll end my business with them. Period.

Postgresql (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477877)

Well, if you are unhappy with Mysql for any reason, Posgresql database [] is an excellent alternative.

Blackballed (1, Interesting)

crimoid (27373) | about 9 years ago | (#13477888)

Anyone remotely concerned with the GPL needs to blackball SCO out of existance.

Re:Blackballed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477976)

What are you saying, that whiteballs aren't as potent?

Asperger's syndrome (3, Funny)

leereyno (32197) | about 9 years ago | (#13477891)

This is like Hasbro or Fisher Price teaming up with Nambla, Ebony magazine teaming up with the KKK, or Oscar Meyer teaming up with PETA.

The people at MySQL-AB must all be suffering from a severe case of asperger's syndrome that is preventing them from understanding how everyone else will view this move.

I'm not sure what MySQL is going to get out of this deal, but whatever it is, it isn't worth the REALLY BAD pr and public ill will that is going to be created.

SCO is boil on the asshole of humanity. There is no excuse for doing business with them. You can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding.


Re:Asperger's syndrome (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13478030)

"SCO is boil on the asshole of humanity."

That is an insult to all the assholes out there.

simple (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477894)


Smooth talking Daryl (4, Insightful)

mr.dreadful (758768) | about 9 years ago | (#13477898)

Wow, this has got to be a coup for SCO, considering what a pariah SCO has become with the open-source community. Even if SCO is offering buckets of cash to MySQL, this seems a really ill-advised decision by the MySQL people.

You are judged by the company you keep.

Frankly I'm not sure I'd hire someone with any certification offered by SCO, mainly because it shows that the person doesn't know very much about the open-source community, and why open-source is so important. Poachers like SCO must not be tolerated, and I for one will not support or endorse them in any way if I can help it.

April 1st?! (5, Funny)

skaap (681715) | about 9 years ago | (#13477907)

I just checked the date! and it's not April 1st .. whats going on here?!?

Re:April 1st?! (1)

WilliamSChips (793741) | about 9 years ago | (#13478050)

The editor forgot the foot icon.

Re:April 1st?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13478052)

I just scratched my ass! and it's not itchy anymore .. whats going on here?!?

That Answers My Question (4, Interesting)

eno2001 (527078) | about 9 years ago | (#13477916)

I've been trying to make a decision as to which open source SQL database to go with for use with the DBMail [] server that I plan on installing here at home. Considering that I couldn't give a rat's ass about web applications (which DBMail is not), it seems like PostgreSQL is the answer. And with the right optimizations, it's likely to be nearly as good a performer as MySQL. Fuck SCO and anyone who choses to work with them.

Re:That Answers My Question (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477961)

I run a cluster of DBMail IMAP servers, and I can say for a fact that after extensive benchmarking, PostgreSQL beats MySQL hands down under the load of 600 users.

I haven't tested MySQL 5 yet, but PG 8 is almost 1.5x the speed of MySQL 4.1.

Re:That Answers My Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13477996)

Fuck SCO and anyone who choses to work with them.

Nah...I only fuck people I like.

Can't help but think that...... (5, Insightful)

mormop (415983) | about 9 years ago | (#13477922)

Going into partnership with SCO just after Novell has applied to freeze their funds with the intention of pillaging them via the courts is not the brightest of ideas.

they need to search through stolen linux code (3, Funny)

ftsf (886792) | about 9 years ago | (#13477929)

grep isnt good enough for them, they need a database to insert all the linux code into so they can search it. and they cant use it under the GPL anymore and postgres is out of the question looks like they'll have to do business with mysql

sigh... (1)

bitbucketeer (892710) | about 9 years ago | (#13477931)

Hmmm... SCO is certainly the kind of company that, as CEO, I'd stake my company's long term survival to. NOT! Oh, and Cindy Sheehan's son says that SCO will file bankruptcy and MySQL's check will bounce.

Giving SCO more rope to hang themselves with? (2, Interesting)

Phil246 (803464) | about 9 years ago | (#13477938)

Surely, with SCO as desperate as they are, and MySQL being their 'lifeline', they cant go all-out on the GPL as they have been in the press incase they anger the folks at MySQL?
That being the case, is there any chance that IBM could pick up on this and run with it in their case vs SCO?
"look here judge, SCO says the GPL is evil and unconstitutional but they're partnered with a company which uses it."

this is a SAD day for the MySQL Community! (1)

v3xt0r (799856) | about 9 years ago | (#13477946)

I still love the mysql database, but now I SERIOUSLY must consider alternatives if they are going to undermind the OSS Community in this manor.

Two words... (1)

Q-Hack! (37846) | about 9 years ago | (#13477957)

Profit Margin.

Why? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 9 years ago | (#13477974)

Why would they do this? To make money perhaps?

MySQL is a business.. they want more mareket.. this gives them more..

Re:Why? (1)

oogoliegoogolie (635356) | about 9 years ago | (#13478031)

People that use MySql will now dump it for alternatives because they dont want to touch anything that touches SCO. MySql's market share will definitely not grow from this.

MySql didn't think this one out.

Oh, bullshit. (3, Insightful)

The Breeze (140484) | about 9 years ago | (#13477979)

Is there any evidence for this other than a 1-paragraph CNET story? There's NOTHING on the mysql site about this, although there's a big thing on SCO's homepage - which, of course, doesn't seem to have any quotes from MySql.

Come on, people, think. SCO routinely issues press releases that have no relation to reality. I wouldn't be surprised if they bought a $50 incident support call or something and referred to that as "signing an agreement."

Someone from mysql needs to check in and let us know what's going on - so far, the only source for this "news" appears to be SCO, and that's no source at all.

Not a real partnership... (5, Informative)

KajiCo (463552) | about 9 years ago | (#13477982)

This isn't one of those buy out, or stock purchasing deals, this is just SCO buying a license to have MySQL in there POS...(oops forgot the IX, or did I?) OS for commercial use. It doesn't look like MySQL is handing over IP rights of any it's code over to SCO. They are just doing the same thing they've been doing with Novell and Dell. SCO is probably the one calling this a "partnership" to try and change it's image.

They have a new "Open Server" coming out. It just goes to show that they are accepting defeat. 948.html []

They realise they're OS sucks, they realise Linux is kicking it's ass, and they know they can't win. They're trying to embrace their new overlords like the spineless money hungry idiots they are.

If they attempt lawsuites such as those against Linux, MySQL can use copyright infringement against them.

Worry when you read SCO buys 55% of MySQL AB, or MySQL sells IP to SCO.

Is the whole company evil, or just the top execs? (4, Insightful)

tji (74570) | about 9 years ago | (#13477998)

I don't know any current SCO employees, but I have always assumed that there were quite a few normal techies working away at SCO, trying their best to ignore the crap coming from management. I know I have often disagreed with the choices/directions of management in companies I have worked for (though, obviously not to the level of SCO's choices). Some of those people have probably stayed to continue their work, despite the behavior at the top.

So, what I'm rambling on about is that the OS side of the house is probably a reasonable group of people, trying to improve a Unix platform. The litigation side of the house is a bunch of worthless bastards. MySQL is working with the former.. even though it still required approval from the latter.

What's up with their license these days? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13478008)

I know of several companies that had built products on MySQL and were then scared to upgrade beyond 3.25 because of the license changes.

Not to make this a BSD vs. GPL thing but it seems like MySQL is GPLed if you don't make money and it has some other license if you do.

Just better and safer to go with PostgreSQL or Firebird, they have better SQL support, transactions and such aren't cobbled in.

Well that simplifies things (0, Redundant)

Starji (578920) | about 9 years ago | (#13478038)

I've been trying to decide which open source database to use for my upcoming senior project, MySQL or PostgreSQL. Thanks MySQL, for making my decision for me.

I'm seriously curious to know what exactly the higher-ups at MySQL were smoking when they agreed to something like this. MySQL really shot themselves in the foot by associating with SCO. Will any open source folks use MySQL after this?

Daryl gave someone at MySQL (1)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | about 9 years ago | (#13478042)

a lot of really, really good blowjobs.
Daryl buys chapstick by the case..

Why not let MySQL know your feelings... (1)

FyRE666 (263011) | about 9 years ago | (#13478056)

This link [] will take you to the contact page. Luckily for me, it's not too difficult to migrate my projects over to PostgreSQL - although I will have to brush up on administration after having not used it for a couple of years...

I actually thought this was just another ludicrous press release from our favourite proprietory software vendor to give them something positive to say on the 7th, but after finding the same release on MySQL's site, it seems confirmed. I'm damned if I'm using anything from a company that deals with SCO (except MS, where I have little choice!)

Huh! (1)

h15n (904962) | about 9 years ago | (#13478071)

When there's PostgreSQL, who cares about MySQL? A gun with no trigger. That's amazing....
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>