mysql 4.x and fedoracore2

[Rodolfo J. Paiz]

On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 18:03 +0200, Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:
> On Mit, 2004-10-27 at 10:59 -0400, James Kosin wrote:
> > If all these things are true, then why doesn't Fedora Core x contain the 
> > latest MySQL version?
> 
> That is a very good question that has been the subject of many lengthy
> discussions here. To make a long story short:
> - MySQL has changed their license to GPL (or commercial) with release 4
> - RedHat has pointed out that this does not allow shipping PHP binaries
>   linked against MySQL
> - MySQL has provided the FOSS exception
> - RedHat came up with the lame excuse that their legal department is not
>   satisfied with the FOSS exception but failed to provide any arguments
> 

Thomas,

I find it reprehensible that you are very close to copy/pasting old
arguments here which have already been beaten to death. Search for "lame
excuse" on the fedora-test-list archives to see what I mean.

Red Hat lives in a very litigious country (the USA). They have to worry
about what their legal department tells them. If they believe they could
be at risk of a lawsuit (and others have demonstrated to you on other
lists that they *could be* at risk), then they damn well sure are going
to take their lawyers' advice over yours.

You think you're smarter than they are? Get your own lawyers (since you
have already admitted that you are not a lawyer and not qualified to
offer a legal opinion) and go convince Red Hat why they are wrong BASED
ON THE LAW and not on your opinions.

Besides, Red Hat is entirely entitled to disagree with you and simply
choose not to include MySQL for any other reason. They are not obligated
to include it just because you (or ten billion other beings) demand it.
Period, end of story. It's their decision, not their "lame excuse." You
don't like it? Switch distros, roll your own MySQL, or live with it.

As I asked before on a separate list, which part of those choices do you
refuse to understand?

-----

For the record, I have no opinion on the legal merits or lack thereof in
the licensing change. I don't know much about licensing, or the law in
this case, and I don't care.

My only opinion is that MySQL AB made a change in their commercial
practices in an open market, and that many customers are choosing to
take their business elsewhere. That's what happens when the market
doesn't like your choices. Tough.

Cheers,

-- 
Rodolfo J. Paiz <rpaiz at simpaticus.com>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20041027/c9f9a4d9/attachment-0001.sig>