Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
Frans Bouma [C# MVP] <pe************ ******@xs4all.n lwrote:
http://www.mysql.com/company/contact/?topic=licensing
before assuming that using connector/net means that your software
has >to be GPL
err... it's very simple:
if you reference/link/use a GPL-ed piece of code in your own code,
your code HAS TO BE licensed under the GPL as well. Read the GPL,
it's very simple.
Read though here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt
I have, you're wrong.
It seems to me that if the GNU licensed .NET provider is distributed
unaltered and in binary form, and reference to the license is made,
it can be used BY a commercial product without issue.
Nonsense, it's released under the GPL, which is simple: IF you use it,
your software has to be GPL-ed as well. IF they would have used the
LGPL, it would be different. Though that's not the case.
That they distribute it in binary form isn't important, they also
distribute it in sourcecode form if you want to, that's what GPL means
as well: if you distribute a GPL-ed licensed product, you have to
provide the sourcecode if asked.
Consider
putting the provider into a component install package, such as might
be the case for a one-click application. Install binaries only and
the commercial application simply utilitizes them.
that's what linking means in the license. You link to the binary
compiled form, and then the license also is in effect.
It is very clear in the license that any modifications or extensions
must be distributed with source code and also under the GPL.
However, USE by a commercial application does NOT constitute a
modification or extension.
WRONG. The GPL isn't different for this particular provider. What you
say here is WRONG, and can hurt people badly if they follow it. Sorry
if I correct you so harshly, but it's best that people who read your
reply know that what you've said is WRONG.
As always, consult legal advice, as nobody [especially me] here is
qualified to offer it.
Well, I've discussed this matter more than enough with MySql AG to
know what I'm talking about. It's even worse than you might imagine,
read on ->
We wanted to target Mysql in our o/r mapper. So we needed to build
against the Mysql provider. We didnt want to make our stuff GPL-ed so
we considered buying a license for the provider so we could compile our
code against the provider.
However, as we provide a middleware layer, our users develop software
with it, and thus also need a provider instance. If they opt for the
GPL-ed version, THEIR software still has to be GPL-ed. MySql AG told me
this without fuzzy words.
Because we said that might be a problem, they answered: "You can
become a VAR".
err... we're not a store to sell MySql stuff, we just provide support
for their database. As the commercial MySql provider license is
expensive (250+ euro per developer), we opted for a much cheaper
variant, the core-lab one.
It's beyond me why on earth a database vendor would ask money for a
connector to their database. Because: no connector, no database usage.
MySql is, to my knowledge, the only one who asks money for their
connector.
So my advice is always: use a different database: firebird, postgresql
etc.. Not only are these databases better than MySql, you also have a
truly free database at hand without hidden costs nor GPL mess.
FB
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead developer of LLBLGen Pro, the productive O/R mapper for .NET
LLBLGen Pro website:
http://www.llblgen.com
My .NET blog:
http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
Microsoft MVP (C#)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
