Option D

Lots of people writing about Snorkle again today ,Monty Says, help saving MySQL

He gives us different options, a , b or c .. but I , and some others, want an option d

No I don't trust Oracle, it's not like they have been a very good Open Source Citizen, yes they contribute to the kernel and other projects but my feeling says it's only because they have to (Kernel, Xen and others ) not because they Want to (thinking about Unfakable etc) , if they would really want to they probably would work with the CentOS community more etc, and as Monty mentions their InnoDB track record could be better.

But on the other hand I don't think the EU should block the deal because Monty wants his baby back , cheap , as honestly imvho that's what they really want, be able to buy MySQL back for a nice price, either beceause Oracle is being forced by the EU to split up Sun, or eventually the deal doesn't come trough and they can buy MySQL back when Sun really goes belly up (which is what probably happens when option a) is chosen.

According to CNN , Oracle has made some pledges about MySQL earlier today.
My main question there however is about the Opposite of option 5. which is exactly what created the problem.

5. Support not mandatory. Customers will not be required to purchase support services from Oracle as a condition to obtaining a commercial license to MySQL.

Yes we want support, but no we don't want a commercial license with it, we want support on the GPL version, which is a problem lots of Open Source vendors struggle with , some of them
force people wanting to buy support to go for the commercial license. And it is exaclty that upselling that got MySQL in the troubles it has today .

Josh Berkus has a point declaring
Dual Licensing dead, just as I he sees much more future in the Percona like model than in the Dual License model MySQL used to have ..

Dries points to one of the comments on
Lukas Kahwe Smith 's Come On Money er Monty article stating
Monty walks away with several millions in hard cash, while [PHP +] MySQL cheerleaders who bet on "MySQL" franchise only walk away with a cute dolphin T-shirt

Which makes me wonder when I`ll be getting a nice Acquia T-shirt :)


Lenz Grimmer's picture

#1 Lenz Grimmer : Mixed up URLs

BTW, the URLs in the last paragraph (Dries pointing to Lukas' blog post) are mixed up - they should be the other way around, I guess :)

Mark Callaghan's picture

#2 Mark Callaghan : commercial license and support


Sun/MySQL makes companies who want a commercial license also buy support. That is, a company that wants an OEM license so they can bundle their closed-source app with MySQL must also buy support. Oracle appears to have relented on this which is a big change from Sun's policy. That should be documented in http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/mysqloemagmt.pdf

I interpret what you wrote to imply that they make support customers also get a commercial license. They don't do that and support would be much more expensive if they did.

Buy support from MySQL and they will try to fix your problems whether you use the Enterprise or Community versions. Both are GPL. Neither give you OEM rights.

Kris Buytaert's picture

#3 Kris Buytaert : Your comment


I think your comment on the pbxt blog is a pretty good summary of my concerns :)

Kris Buytaert's picture

#4 Kris Buytaert : Not anymore

As said to the other Mark already, but they have been doing that for years.. also see Arjen Lenz's reply about Sun upselling to Non GPL Licenses for years ...

Mark Callaghan's picture

#5 Mark Callaghan : upselling


I have heard stories about that. I am at least twice removed from the source so I won't repeat it. But I would expect any company about to sign an expensive deal to get an OEM license to also do the due diligence to determine whether they really need that license.

It would also not be in the best interest of Sun to make a lot of deals like that and end up with a lot of anti-reference accounts.

I also hear stories about companies who try to figure out how the GPL doesn't apply to them even though they are distributing closed-source software bundled with MySQL and I wonder whether they are the source of some stories like this. If you are bundling MySQL to sell an app, then there are legal and moral reasons for sending money to MySQL.

Kris Buytaert's picture

#6 Kris Buytaert : Not gonna go over the legal

Not gonna go over the legal and moral reasons anymore.


Arjen Lentz's picture

#7 Arjen Lentz : selfless...

See http://pbxt.blogspot.com/2009/12/montys-appeal-is-selfless.html for Paul McCullagh's (PBXT engine) take on Monty's actions. I think he's quite right. In effect, Monty Program and others position would be improved with Oracle mucking things up, so going with self interest, Monty would promote that. He doesn't, because *others* lose out.

Arjen Lentz's picture

#8 Arjen Lentz : no kris

Anyone who knows Monty knows that he tends to say what he means and means what he says. You asserting "but really Monty wants this" is IMHO unjustified and unfair. You have no track record from Monty to base this accusation on.

Removing that accusation, what are your other arguments?

Regarding support... others offer it, including Open Query and Percona. Both offer a breadth and variety of services that Sun/MySQL does not have. So, there is choice there. No need for the non-GPL licensing.
I fully agree with you that Sun/MySQL has been upselling (the dual licensing scam) to non-GPL licenses for years, I've written about this several times and it remains a serious problem in the market place. It gives OSS a bad name.

Kris Buytaert's picture

#9 Kris Buytaert : What arguments are they in favour of blocking ?

So tell me if I`m getting this right ...

If indeed, as the PBTX guy says , Monty isn't talking for himself as he will gain, then isn't he supporting the commercial version rather than the open version ?

So he is trying to engage the Open Source community to save commercial vendors of MySQL ?

Call me stupid.. but to me I see no reason why he should be blocking, as indeed .. when Oracle goes evil , Monty Program , Open Query, Percona and others will be the ones to benefit most. That is if they base they business model on services, not on dual licensing.

I see Linux distros quickly replacing MySQL with MariaSQL as default package etc.

And wouldn't it be good if that would happen sooner than later ?

What am I missing ?

Kris Buytaert's picture

#10 Kris Buytaert : Today


Today yes,
I was talking about history, some years ago when that option didnt' exist,
I recall different customer caseswhere we had that problem.

Mark Leith's picture

#11 Mark Leith : Support is available for GPL (Enterprise) and OEM/Commercial

"Yes we want support, but no we don't want a commercial license with it, we want support on the GPL version, which is a problem lots of Open Source vendors struggle with , some of them force people wanting to buy support to go for the commercial license. And it is exaclty that upselling that got MySQL in the troubles it has today ."

MySQL Support serves both Enterprise and Commercial customers. Enterprise customers get the "MySQL Enterprise Server" - which is itself a GPL version of the server, with extra releases such as Service Packs that are released quarterly, with only S1 fixes backported for stability. You do not need an OEM license for MySQL Support to work with you, just an Enterprise license..


Mark Leith
(MySQL Regional Support Manager, Americas)