MySQL 4.1.7 Stable version
Brought to you by:
whity
Menu
▾
▴
Will DirectSQL be updated to support CLIENT_PROTOCOL_41 and CLIENT_SECURE_CONNECTION?
Yes. The version 1.2.0 does actually supports this for quite a while, but i do not know when it would be released... The delay reason is the licensing model change of mysql client library, and the only way to release it immediatelly would be to enforce GPL - eg no one has to use the library for non-GPL purposes.
Kind regards,
Cristian Nicola
I'm no lawyer, and Direct Mysql is GPL-ed for 2 reasons:
- mysql server was GPL at the time.
- at the time i only had enough "nerves" to read GPL license, never after had enough courage to read the rest of them ..
However, mysql is dual licensed - it has a GPL license and a commercial one. The commercial one direct mysql is currently missing.
What i did not know is that something released under GPL may not be used otherwise than GPL and every single person that asked me for permission to use Direct Mysql in commercial projects has been granted permission to do so. (i'm not going to mention the ones that had not asked for permission ;) )
The problem is that apparently Direct Mysql is derivative work which means it has to adhere to mysql licensing model, which basically means i would/should NOT allow any other usege that GPL. Failing to do so (eg forcing everyone to use GPL), puts me in the position of breaking GPL, which basically leaves me in a questionable position.
What i can/should do?
First of all probably i need to discuss the matter with a lawyer, but good lawyers cost money and honestly i'm anything but rich.
Second i need to go back to all the people who ever asked me for permission to use direct mysql in their projects and tell them "sorry you cannot use it anymore", unless your project does not break GPL.
Only after at least the second step is done i could release a new version - and honestly i never kept track of all the people asking for permission to use it.
So to cut a long story short - i have no idea what to do legally :D
The 3 options are:
a) not release anything anymore, or at least until the things are cleared out...
b) force GPL, meaning no one should ever be allowed to use direct mysql otherwise than GPL-compliant
c) change the licensing model
The 1.2.x version has been fully supporting all the new protocol features (new password, extended fields informations, errors format change), for many many months now .. and honestly do not know what to do with it.
Version 3 (i've lost version 2 in a hdd crash) should be ready shortly - was planning to have it finished by the end of this month and ready for release on january ...and again do not know what to do about it.
There have been few threads over various newsgroups in regards to this license model .. and no one has been able so far to give any answer.
Kind regards,
Cristian Nicola
Hi Cristian,
Thanks for the reply. As far as I can see both mysql client library is GPL and DirectSQL's units were always commented GPL. So, what is the problem?.. simply release 1.2 under GPL as well!
Besides, I can not see how mysql client library's license model is related to DirectSQL's license model. DirectSQL includes NO source code from MySQL, it is completely original and written/developed from scratch in delphi. That MySQL code is used as a reference to make DirectSQL compatible, does NOT mean DirectSQL has to be GPL just because you looked at the MySQL code.
As far as I can see, which license you apply to DirectSQL has nothing to do with any other license and is purely your own choice. The test is simple... browse through DirectSQL code and check if you can see a single line of MySQL code. The answer is obviously, No, because all DirectSQL code is in pascal, in classes and different units. On top of this fact, DirectSQL can't be compiled with MySQL code, nor is it dependent on any MySQL source units. Thus, DirectSQL is an unique project and the licensing model is purely your own to determine.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Regards.
Our company consults lawyers all day on GPL and other licensing models. Here is three points for you (and I am quoting from the GPL):
1. Three conditions for GPL:
a) "a work containing the Program or a portion of it".. DirectSQL's answer NO.
b) "either verbatim or with modifications"... DirectSQL's answer NO.
c) "translated into another language"... DirectSQL's answer NO. As the code is NOT a direct port to delphi. If the code was a direct port, it would have been possible to match units in Delphi to units in C (In fact libmysql contains 127 files vs DirectSQL's 7). It would also have been possible to match line for line code from Delphi to those in MySQL C (as one can hardly find the correct unit to match the GPL unit in C, to find a specific method or even one line of code that match is close to impossible, especially all of DirectSQL is in classes and not straight C). Neither of these are thus true.
Further more:
"If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works." - This definitely applies to DirectSQL
2. DirectSQL is NOT a derived work of the MySQL source, it IS a derived work from the MySQL protocol (between client and server). The protocol does NOT fall under GPL, nor can it ever fall under GPL.
In short, to study someone else's protocol or even source to learn coding techniques is not GPL. If this was the case then everything any developer has ever learned from analyzing someone else's code will be deemed invalid and everything they ever wrote will then be GPLed. Which is simply insane! Thus everything in our minds can never be deemed to be GPL.
This means that DirectSQL is not GPL by virtue of MySQL's GPL, but ONLY because you (i.e. cristian) decided it is GPL.
3. When you decide your code is GPL, it is not your responsibility to make sure everyone in the world using your code adheres to the GPL license. THAT is the responsibility of each developer using the GPL code.
Which means you can publish your GPL code any time any where and not give two hoots about what someone else does with it. Which thus boils down to you being able to publish your DirectSQL 1.2/3 and never look back. This is the essence of Open Source... i.e. No Control, free to use and changes being send back to the source developer.
Too many people worry about the virus-nature of GPL and too few about the intent of the GPL license imho ;)
Regards, G
What's the latest on this? The legal aspect seems to be moot, and this added functionality would be greatly appreciated.