RE: [gnome-db] MySQL client API is GPL, not LGPL

[Murray Cumming Comneon com]

> On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 16:40, Murray Cumming Comneon com wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 13:52, Murray Cumming Comneon com wrote:
> > > > I recently discovered that MySQL changed the license for
> > > their client
> > > > libs to GPL, although it was previously LGPL. But 
> libgda is LGPL. 
> > > > I
> > > > don't think that is possible, if libgda links to the MySQL libs.
> > > > 
> > > right, we suspected this, but haven't had enough time to see
> > > what to do. So, what do people think?
> > > 
> > > Should we make the MySQL provider just link with the LGPL
> > > versions (3.x.x)?
> > 
> > I don't think that's a good plan for the future. Eventually MySQL 4 
> > will be everywhere and MySQL 3 will not.
> > 
> yes, that was my question, if from now on all MySQL libraries 
> will be GPL, or if there will be some LGPL 
> a-bit-older-than-the-GPL release

I don't actually know whether they install in parallel, but I think it is
highly unlikely. MySQL don't do that kind of thing very well.

> > > This seems to be the best thing to do, but
> > > would there newer LGPL versions, or from now on all will be GPL?
> > 
> > We are unlikely to get a clear explanation from MySQL.
>
> > 
> how so? Do you think asking them is not worthy?

Yes, but feel free. I have a very low opinion of the MySQL company. It is
hard enough just to discover what the licenses are. They seem to be confused
themselves.
 
> > I guess some kind of plug-in system would be helpful. Then we could 
> > ship the MySQL provider separately, under the GPL.
> > 
> that would still be "illegal", I guess, since it would still 
> be linking, in some way or the other, unless we use an IPC 
> mechanism, like CORBA or whatever for the MySQL provider.

Yes, maybe, I guess so. I hoped that we could pass on the responsibility to
the developer who decided to use the GPL provider.

It looks like you need to remove the MySQL provider.

Murray Cumming
www.murrayc.com
murrayc usa net