Re: Some free utilities for Java, with Hebrew support.
bbound@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 24, 5:46 am, Owen Jacobson <angrybald...@gmail.com> wrote:
Clearly there's demand for a client library license-compatible with
closed-source development.
For MySQL? Forgive my blindness, but I see no such demand on the
market at large.
What demand, then, do you believe the MySQL company is addressing when
it sells non-GPL versions of its own client library?
Very little.
I think most refuse to pay.
Several pay for the support (which is said to be excellent) and get
the non-GPL license as a bonus.
I do see a demand for closed-source-compatible database access,
certainly. That demand is well served by other players in the market,
such as PostgreSQL (open source; berkeley licensed) and SQL Server
Express Edition (closed source; different licensing structure from
MySQL) as well as others.
Sounds like the "more open" PostgreSQL should be taking over MySQL's
market share, assuming the Postgre server performs decently and can
easily be populated with data from a MySQL database so migration is
easy. If migration is hard, then established MySQL-using systems will
exhibit inertia though, and same where there's no benefit of migration
(e.g. the use of MySQL is open source, so MySQL isn't sticking their
hand in anyone's pocket).
End users don't care - GPL is not a problem for them.
ISV's using an open source layer between them and MySQL does
not care - the FLOSS exception cover them.
Other ISV's have a dilemma - my impression is that only the minority
pay and that the majority goes for other solutions - PostgreSQL being
one of them.
I see no viable market for a MySQL client library.
MySQL seems to see one.
Maybe. Maybe not.
They definitely need the connectors to sell their main product the
database.
Whether GPL'ing the connectors is based on business or more ideological
reasons I do not know.
Arne