> Every language has it's strengths and
> weaknesses, with a variety of languages to choose from you can choose
> the best tool for the job.
OK - granted.
> > With the *_Interbase_* Open Source, the only allowed committers were
> > AFAIK, Borland employees, but this project died after a few months, and
> > was re-embraced and re-extended by Borland.
> Ahh... maybe I was confusing the two.
Happens quite a bit.
> Well, thats good for the firebase
> community, and puts them a step ahead of oracle/m$/mysql/etc... in my
> > You are certainly allowed deploy commercial apps which user Interbase
> > Open Source (discontinued) or Firebird for *_no licence fee
> > whatsoever_*.
> > I've done it!
> Maybe I just need to go read the IPL, but if you do that, don't you have
> to make copies of your code available?
No. You only have to make modifications to the engine available, not if
you hook into the db using your own code through ODBC or Delphi
> With BSD you can modify the code
> and sell it and you don't have to expose that code to no one not ever
> never :-) While a lot of open source folks don't like that fact, it's
> certainly a boon to business to not have to worry about it.
Indeed - again, a discussion of the merits of the various Open Source
licences is beyond the scope of this thread. All I *_can_* say for
absolute certain is that if you deploy Firebird (or Interbase Open
Source) you do not have to disclose your code - you only have to do this
if you modify the database engine itself, not for using it.
> BTW - Not sure if your aware, but there is an interpretation of the gpl
> that says that if your software would not operate without the existence
> of a gpl'd piece of software, then your software should be gpl as well.
I believe that the MPL/IPL was devised to get around that problem.
> This would include applications hard coded to connect to only one
> database. Now, I don't necessarily agree with this POV, but a company
> like mysql would have a lot to gain if that interpretation were to ever
> be confirmed legally.
I don't think this is applicable to Firebird.
> > > Hmm... I'd guess there is something similar for folks running firebird on
> > > *nix? Actually I'd guess that all of these database have *some way* of doing
> > > this, but again, I don't think its as easy or as extensible as postgresql.
> > Probably not.
> Doh! That's kind of a downer... I'm one of those folks who would never
> choose to run a production database on windows...
I'm not sure whether we're talking at cross purposes here. With the
systems for which Firebird is available, it is certainly possible to
write functions using native lanaguages.
> > I don't know much (anything) about PHP - but I do know that there are
> > Firebird users who use it.
> yes... i know there are people doing this as well, but I can't see how
> they do it unless they are using the generic odbc connection
> functions... odd.
Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/firebird-php/ - why is it odd to do
it using ODBC?
> > I haven't got down and dirty into PostgreSQL yet, but I will pipe up as
> > I start to get a handle on things.
> Please do, I think you've already been pretty informative so far.
Look forward to it.
> Robert Treat
plinehan x__AT__x yahoo x__DOT__x com
C++ Builder 5 SP1, Interbase 220.127.116.11 IBX 5.04 W2K Pro
Please do not top-post.
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Rick Morris||Date: 2003-12-01 00:41:47|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Advocacy, Thoughts and Comments|
|Previous:||From: Christopher Browne||Date: 2003-11-30 18:54:10|
|Subject: Re: Call from Info World|