Re: postgre vs MySQL

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> wrote:
> craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au (Craig Ringer) writes:
> > Erik Jones wrote:
> >> They've gotten around that by making MySQL "dual-licensed". If
> >> you're going to be using MySQL in a commercial application then you
> >> can not use the GPL'd version, you have to use their paid,
> >> commercial license.
> >>
> > My understanding is that's not quite true. The client libraries are
> > GPL, so you can't use them directly, but I don't see what would stop
> > you using their ODBC/JDBC drivers with your non-GPL application
> > (especially if you support other ODBC databases as well). The server
> > can't be bundled in your application, but you can still get the user
> > to install it and use it with your application.
>
> Well, there's a certain amount of distance between "expectations" and
> "legal requirements," and lots of room for weasel wording...
>
>
> <http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?4,31,888#msg-888>
>
> <http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/>
>
> According to the above things that MySQL AB has said/continues to say,
> it is quite clear that the owners of the code *intend* that
> "commercial users" should pay them a licensing fee,

Read this earlier response where Zak makes it quite clear that web
services that are run in house do not violate the GPL terms for the
distribution of MySQL.

http://forums.mysql.com/read.php?4,31,63#msg-63