f



Open Source Database as an Alternative MS Access?

Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
alternative to MS Access?


TIA
0
Dan
1/18/2004 4:28:48 AM
comp.os.linux.development.apps 5216 articles. 1 followers. Post Follow

29 Replies
815 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 46

Dan <dan@nospam.com> writes:

> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
> alternative to MS Access?

http://www.icewalkers.com/Linux/Software/Applications/Databases/140/
0
Billy
1/18/2004 4:46:20 AM
In article <4YnOb.91694$fq1.71625@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>, Dan wrote:

> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
> alternative to MS Access?

http://www.rekallrevealed.org/

Dave Cook
0
David
1/18/2004 7:08:07 AM
Dan wrote:
> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
> alternative to MS Access?
> 
> 
> TIA

ReKall is maybe what you are looking for. But why not use PHP language 
conjunction with MySQL database.

With PHP you can create both pure-web and off-web applications. And 
MySQL is very easy to use and manage.

Anyway, study the database section in our "Link Jungle". 
http://home.online.no/~osmoma/#html

These are for db-management:
   http://www.phpmyadmin.net
   http://squirrel-sql.sourceforge.net/

// os moma
    http://www.futuredesktop.org






0
os
1/18/2004 10:19:18 AM
On 1/18/2004 4:19 AM, os moma wrote:

> Dan wrote:
> 
>> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>> alternative to MS Access?
>>
>>
>> TIA
> 
> 
> ReKall is maybe what you are looking for. But why not use PHP language 
> conjunction with MySQL database.
> 
> With PHP you can create both pure-web and off-web applications. And 
> MySQL is very easy to use and manage.
> 
> Anyway, study the database section in our "Link Jungle". 
> http://home.online.no/~osmoma/#html
> 
> These are for db-management:
>   http://www.phpmyadmin.net
>   http://squirrel-sql.sourceforge.net/
> 
> // os moma
>    http://www.futuredesktop.org
> 

Unfortunately none of these are like Accces which is installed easily by 
a a normal user and can easily then create table, queries, macros, 
reports.  MySQl is server based so os not menat for a standalone install 
plus I was hoping it would also run on M$ Windows.  I think OpenOffice 
is working on a front end to db's that provides creation of tables, 
qeuries, and reports.  Is this so?
0
Dan
1/18/2004 7:44:59 PM
Dan <dan@nospam.com> writes:

> On 1/18/2004 4:19 AM, os moma wrote:
> 
> > Dan wrote:
> >
> >> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
> >> alternative to MS Access?
> >>
> >>
> >> TIA
> > ReKall is maybe what you are looking for. But why not use PHP
> > language conjunction with MySQL database.
> > With PHP you can create both pure-web and off-web applications. And
> > MySQL is very easy to use and manage.
> > Anyway, study the database section in our "Link
> > Jungle". http://home.online.no/~osmoma/#html
> > These are for db-management:
> >   http://www.phpmyadmin.net
> >   http://squirrel-sql.sourceforge.net/
> > // os moma
> >    http://www.futuredesktop.org
> >
> 
> Unfortunately none of these are like Accces which is installed easily
> by a a normal user and can easily then create table, queries, macros,
> reports.  MySQl is server based so os not menat for a standalone
> install plus I was hoping it would also run on M$ Windows.  I think
> OpenOffice is working on a front end to db's that provides creation of
> tables, qeuries, and reports.  Is this so?


Are you aware that

a) MySQL and Postgresql can be installed on the user's machine (no
extra server needed)

b) MySQL and Postgresql have GUI utilities which allow creation of new
tables and attributes, and allow data entry.

0
Harry
1/18/2004 9:08:26 PM
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:28:48 GMT wrote Dan <dan@nospam.com> in
comp.os.linux.development.apps with
<4YnOb.91694$fq1.71625@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>

>Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>alternative to MS Access?

Don't know what you mean by PERSONAL, but whats wrong with MySQL?

-- 
Gerhard Gruber
Maintainer of
SoftICE for Linux - http://pice.sourceforge.net/
Fast application launcher - http://sourceforge.net/projects/launchmenu
0
Gerhard
1/18/2004 10:03:26 PM
After a long battle with technology, Dan <dan@nospam.com>, an earthling, wrote:
> On 1/18/2004 4:19 AM, os moma wrote:
>
>> Dan wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>>> alternative to MS Access?
>>>
>>>
>>> TIA
>> ReKall is maybe what you are looking for. But why not use PHP
>> language conjunction with MySQL database.
>> With PHP you can create both pure-web and off-web applications. And
>> MySQL is very easy to use and manage.
>> Anyway, study the database section in our "Link
>> Jungle". http://home.online.no/~osmoma/#html
>> These are for db-management:
>>   http://www.phpmyadmin.net
>>   http://squirrel-sql.sourceforge.net/
>> // os moma
>>    http://www.futuredesktop.org
>>
>
> Unfortunately none of these are like Accces which is installed
> easily by a a normal user and can easily then create table, queries,
> macros, reports.  MySQl is server based so os not menat for a
> standalone install plus I was hoping it would also run on M$
> Windows.  I think OpenOffice is working on a front end to db's that
> provides creation of tables, qeuries, and reports.  Is this so?

Actually, you give "Accces" a lot too much credit.

It, much like any of the database systems that run on Linux, must be
installed by a Windows administrative user.

What tends to happen, when people decide to start the "Great Accces
Replacement" project, is one of three things:

  1.  They discover that it is less work to accomplish their projects
      by using proper database systems, with either some sort of
      Qt/GTK/other toolkit, or via a web application.

      So, instead of building the "Accces replacement," they scratch
      their itch by building something simpler.

  2.  Those that stay intent on fabricating a slavish replica of
      "Accces" have to concurrently implement a GUI as well as a
      robust embedded database.

      If they come in without a good understanding of relational
      databases, then this effort will fail because DB implementation
      is a tough task, one that they _can't_ succeed in if they
      haven't a good understanding of the literature and algorithms.

In effect, those that could be competent to implement an "Accces"
replacement know that it's such a flawed tool as to make it a severe
challenge to describe a reasonable alternative.

Furthermore, the people that slavishly demand something just like
"Accces" seem to be so slavish about trying to replicate its demerits
that they seem unable to comprehend that there might actually be
merits to the way more robust systems are implemented.

Regrettably, people will presumably continue to start projects that
will founder...
-- 
output = reverse("gro.gultn" "@" "enworbbc")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/postgresql.html
"There  is something in  the lecture  course which  may not  have been
visible so far, which is reality ..."  -- Arthur Norman
0
Christopher
1/18/2004 10:58:57 PM
In the last exciting episode, Gerhard W. Gruber <sparhawk@gmx.at> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:28:48 GMT wrote Dan <dan@nospam.com> in
> comp.os.linux.development.apps with
> <4YnOb.91694$fq1.71625@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
>
>>Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>>alternative to MS Access?
>
> Don't know what you mean by PERSONAL, but whats wrong with MySQL?

It's nearly $300 more expensive than MS Access.  $495 versus $229.

After all, if you aren't planning to release your code under the GPL,
the vendor expects you to purchase commercial licenses for MySQL(tm).
-- 
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "ntlug.org")
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/wp.html
Rules of  the Evil  Overlord #120. "Since  nothing is  more irritating
than a hero  defeating you with basic math skills,  all of my personal
weapons  will be  modified to  fire one  more shot  than  the standard
issue." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
0
Christopher
1/18/2004 10:58:58 PM
Gerhard W. Gruber wrote:

> Don't know what you mean by PERSONAL, but whats wrong with MySQL?

It's much easier and shorter to tell what's NOT wrong with MySQL:
it is very popular.

Carlos
--

0
Carlos
1/19/2004 12:55:04 AM
Christopher Browne wrote:

> In the last exciting episode, Gerhard W. Gruber <sparhawk@gmx.at> wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:28:48 GMT wrote Dan <dan@nospam.com> in
>> comp.os.linux.development.apps with
>> <4YnOb.91694$fq1.71625@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
>>
>>>Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>>>alternative to MS Access?
>>
>> Don't know what you mean by PERSONAL, but whats wrong with MySQL?
> 
> It's nearly $300 more expensive than MS Access.  $495 versus $229.
> 
> After all, if you aren't planning to release your code under the GPL,
> the vendor expects you to purchase commercial licenses for MySQL(tm).

That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
code based on it. A PERSONAL use would not qualify and thus no cost.

For that matter you could just as easily use PostgreSQL, which has no cost
or restrictions.


-- 
remove .spam from address to reply by e-mail.
0
James
1/19/2004 2:59:01 AM
James McIninch writes:
> That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
> code based on it.

AND not release that code under the GPL.
-- 
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
0
John
1/19/2004 3:15:54 AM
The world rejoiced as James McIninch <james.mcininch@comcast.net.spam> wrote:
> Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>> In the last exciting episode, Gerhard W. Gruber <sparhawk@gmx.at> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:28:48 GMT wrote Dan <dan@nospam.com> in
>>> comp.os.linux.development.apps with
>>> <4YnOb.91694$fq1.71625@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
>>>
>>>>Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>>>>alternative to MS Access?
>>>
>>> Don't know what you mean by PERSONAL, but whats wrong with MySQL?
>> 
>> It's nearly $300 more expensive than MS Access.  $495 versus $229.
>> 
>> After all, if you aren't planning to release your code under the GPL,
>> the vendor expects you to purchase commercial licenses for MySQL(tm).
>
> That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
> code based on it. A PERSONAL use would not qualify and thus no cost.

No, I wrote what I meant to write.  If you are not planning to release
your code under the GPL, then the vendor expects you to pay for
commercial licenses.  Commercial purpose is not particularly relevant;
you should probably check your assumptions against the what the vendor
actually says.

> For that matter you could just as easily use PostgreSQL, which has
> no cost or restrictions.

True enough.
-- 
(reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.mca" "@" "enworbbc"))
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/unix.html
"What   Would Jesus Drive?   Well, he  was  a carpenter,  so what with
needing to cart wood and tools and such around, it probably would be a
truck or an SUV..."  -- Jay Leno, chatting with Dennis Miller
0
Christopher
1/19/2004 5:15:19 AM
On 18 Jan 2004 22:58:58 GMT wrote Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> in
comp.os.linux.development.apps with
<buf33i$gkn70$2@ID-125932.news.uni-berlin.de>

>It's nearly $300 more expensive than MS Access.  $495 versus $229.

Last time I looked MySQL was GPL and free if you don't want to use a
commercial licence for some reason. Note that the commercial licence is only
at your choice. Companies prefer to have something like that because they feel
more comfortable. So if this is the only objection then you can forget it. :)

Grab it and use it. I thought you had some objections like its to large, or to
complicated or along these lines, you with saying PERSONAL.

>After all, if you aren't planning to release your code under the GPL,
>the vendor expects you to purchase commercial licenses for MySQL(tm).

If you write code FOR MySQl then this is true. If you write code utilizing
MySQL just as a database then this is not possible with GPL.

-- 
Gerhard Gruber
Maintainer of
SoftICE for Linux - http://pice.sourceforge.net/
Fast application launcher - http://sourceforge.net/projects/launchmenu
0
Gerhard
1/19/2004 7:40:47 PM
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:55:04 -0500 wrote Carlos Moreno
<moreno_at_mochima_dot_com@xx.xxx> in comp.os.linux.development.apps with
<bVFOb.18077$2b5.550801@wagner.videotron.net>

>It's much easier and shorter to tell what's NOT wrong with MySQL:
>it is very popular.

Since the OP only wrote one sentence withoug giving any reason, it is quite
hard to know what he intends, and therefore to give any advice based on this
intent. :)

-- 
Gerhard Gruber
Maintainer of
SoftICE for Linux - http://pice.sourceforge.net/
Fast application launcher - http://sourceforge.net/projects/launchmenu
0
Gerhard
1/19/2004 7:42:17 PM
Dan <dan@nospam.com> writes:

> Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
> alternative to MS Access?

I installed PostgreSQL for personal use.  A multi-user DB can always
work with just a single user!

There are a number of programs which give "Access-like" functionality.
For example, pgAccess, Mergeant.

I quickly realised that I didn't want an access-like application.  I
wanted my own application to have database functionality, so I used
libpqxx (http://pqxx.tk/) and my own object layer above it
(http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/libpqxx-object/) [Warning, still
pre-alpha and incomplete!].  Now my programs just talk to
PostgreSQL--instant multi-user transaction-safe application!


-- 
Roger Leigh

                Printing on GNU/Linux?  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
                GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848.  Please sign and encrypt your mail.


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
0
Roger
1/19/2004 7:54:59 PM
In article <buf33i$gkn70$2@ID-125932.news.uni-berlin.de>, Christopher Browne wrote:
> In the last exciting episode, Gerhard W. Gruber <sparhawk@gmx.at> wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 04:28:48 GMT wrote Dan <dan@nospam.com> in
>> comp.os.linux.development.apps with
>> <4YnOb.91694$fq1.71625@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>
>>
>>>Is there any project team working on a PERSONAL database as an
>>>alternative to MS Access?
>>
>> Don't know what you mean by PERSONAL, but whats wrong with MySQL?
> 
> It's nearly $300 more expensive than MS Access.  $495 versus $229.
> 
> After all, if you aren't planning to release your code under the GPL,
> the vendor expects you to purchase commercial licenses for MySQL(tm).
Well, you could stick with version 3.23, only version 4 and above
have the GPL requirements.. That is, for the client libraries,
you could always write your own non GPL client library.
Then again, PostgreSQL is just way better anyway.

The original poster should also take a look at OpenOffice. Despite people
telling it lacks an Access equivialent, it _does_ have
very good database support, it needs a backend though.


-- 
Nils Olav Selåsdal <NOS@Utel.no>
System Developer, UtelSystems a/s
w w w . u t e l s y s t e m s . c o m

0
iso
1/19/2004 10:14:26 PM
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> transmitted:
> James McIninch writes:
>> That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
>> code based on it.
>
> AND not release that code under the GPL.

Drop off the phrase "for a commercial purpose" and you're nearer to
reality...
-- 
wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','ntlug.org').
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/spreadsheets.html
"A good system can't have a weak command language."  -- Alan Perlis
[This explains why MS-DOS and Windows can't possibly be good
systems...] 
0
Christopher
1/19/2004 11:27:56 PM
Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> writes:

> In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> transmitted:
> > James McIninch writes:
> >> That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
> >> code based on it.
> >
> > AND not release that code under the GPL.
> 
> Drop off the phrase "for a commercial purpose" and you're nearer to
> reality...

See:
http://www.mysql.com/downloads/mysql-4.0.html

"The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
General Public License (GPL) and is provided "as is" and is without
any warranty.

You need to purchase commercial non-GPL MySQL licenses:

    * If you distribute MySQL Software with your non open source software,
    * If you want warranty from MySQL AB for the MySQL software,
    * If you want to support MySQL development.
"

Which part of this matches your repeated claims?  As you know, the GPL
itself is copyrighted and (as I understadn it) one cannot add or take
away features of the license without violating that copyright -- no
matter what may be written or claimed elsewhere.


> -- 
> wm(X,Y):-write(X),write('@'),write(Y). wm('cbbrowne','ntlug.org').
> http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/spreadsheets.html
> "A good system can't have a weak command language."  -- Alan Perlis
> [This explains why MS-DOS and Windows can't possibly be good
> systems...] 
0
Harry
1/20/2004 1:46:12 AM
Harry George quotes:
> "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
> General Public License (GPL) and is provided "as is" and is without any
> warranty.

> You need to purchase commercial non-GPL MySQL licenses:

>    * If you distribute MySQL Software with your non open source software,
>    * If you want warranty from MySQL AB for the MySQL software,
>    * If you want to support MySQL development."

> Which part of this matches your repeated claims?

All of it.  "Commercial" is not a synonym for "closed source".

> As you know, the GPL itself is copyrighted and (as I understadn it) one
> cannot add or take away features of the license without violating that
> copyright -- no matter what may be written or claimed elsewhere.

You may not distribute altered version of the document itself.  This does
not, however, prevent you from stating exceptions.

Example: I publish foobar-ng.  At the top of each file I put:

         Copyright 2004 John Hasler.  This program is licensed under the
         terms stated in the file 'copyright'.

The file 'copyright' contains:

         Foobar-ng is copyright 2004 by John Hasler.  It is licensed under
         the terms of the General Public License version 2 (a copy is
         included in the file 'COPYING') with the following exceptions:
         
         You may not distribute copies of Foobar-ng to the United States
         Transportation Security Administration.


This would, of course, make Foobar-ng GPL-incompatible and not DFSG
compliant, but it would be legal.
-- 
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
0
John
1/20/2004 3:08:00 AM
Quoth Harry George <hgg9140@seanet.com>:
> Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> writes:
>
>> In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> transmitted:
>> > James McIninch writes:
>> >> That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
>> >> code based on it.
>> >
>> > AND not release that code under the GPL.
>> 
>> Drop off the phrase "for a commercial purpose" and you're nearer to
>> reality...
>
> See:
> http://www.mysql.com/downloads/mysql-4.0.html
>
> "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
> General Public License (GPL) and is provided "as is" and is without
> any warranty.
>
> You need to purchase commercial non-GPL MySQL licenses:
>
>     * If you distribute MySQL Software with your non open source software,
>     * If you want warranty from MySQL AB for the MySQL software,
>     * If you want to support MySQL development.
> "
>
> Which part of this matches your repeated claims?  

The very first one...
-- 
let name="aa454" and tld="freenet.carleton.ca" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://cbbrowne.com/info/lsf.html
We are in fact well and truly doomed.
-- Jamie Zawinski http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html
0
Christopher
1/20/2004 3:52:27 AM
Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> writes:

> Quoth Harry George <hgg9140@seanet.com>:
> > Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> writes:
> >
> >> In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> transmitted:
> >> > James McIninch writes:
> >> >> That is, if you intend to use MySQL for a commercial purpose AND release
> >> >> code based on it.
> >> >
> >> > AND not release that code under the GPL.
> >> 
> >> Drop off the phrase "for a commercial purpose" and you're nearer to
> >> reality...
> >
> > See:
> > http://www.mysql.com/downloads/mysql-4.0.html
> >
> > "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
> > General Public License (GPL) and is provided "as is" and is without
> > any warranty.
> >
> > You need to purchase commercial non-GPL MySQL licenses:
> >
> >     * If you distribute MySQL Software with your non open source software,
> >     * If you want warranty from MySQL AB for the MySQL software,
> >     * If you want to support MySQL development.
> > "
> >
> > Which part of this matches your repeated claims?  
> 
> The very first one...
> -- 
> let name="aa454" and tld="freenet.carleton.ca" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
> http://cbbrowne.com/info/lsf.html
> We are in fact well and truly doomed.
> -- Jamie Zawinski http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nscpdorm.html

I must have missed something in the original post (which I'm not
finding right now).  Was the OP intending to *distribute* or just
*use* a personal database?  If it is distribute, then he can instead
just tell prospective users to get their own copy of MySQL to use
alongside his own code.  If it is use, then I don't see a problem.

0
Harry
1/20/2004 5:37:28 AM
John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> writes:

> Harry George quotes:
> > "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
> > General Public License (GPL) and is provided "as is" and is without any
> > warranty.
> 
> > You need to purchase commercial non-GPL MySQL licenses:
> 
> >    * If you distribute MySQL Software with your non open source software,
> >    * If you want warranty from MySQL AB for the MySQL software,
> >    * If you want to support MySQL development."
> 
> > Which part of this matches your repeated claims?
> 
> All of it.  "Commercial" is not a synonym for "closed source".
> 
> > As you know, the GPL itself is copyrighted and (as I understadn it) one
> > cannot add or take away features of the license without violating that
> > copyright -- no matter what may be written or claimed elsewhere.
> 
> You may not distribute altered version of the document itself.  This does
> not, however, prevent you from stating exceptions.
> 
> Example: I publish foobar-ng.  At the top of each file I put:
> 
>          Copyright 2004 John Hasler.  This program is licensed under the
>          terms stated in the file 'copyright'.
> 
> The file 'copyright' contains:
> 
>          Foobar-ng is copyright 2004 by John Hasler.  It is licensed under
>          the terms of the General Public License version 2 (a copy is
>          included in the file 'COPYING') with the following exceptions:
>          
>          You may not distribute copies of Foobar-ng to the United States
>          Transportation Security Administration.
> 
> 
> This would, of course, make Foobar-ng GPL-incompatible and not DFSG
> compliant, but it would be legal.
> -- 
> John Hasler
> john@dhh.gt.org
> Dancing Horse Hill
> Elmwood, Wisconsin
 

From the GPL: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim
copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed."

What you have described is a valid use of GPL -- referencing and
extending.  That is not the same as claiming you are using the GPL (as
MySQL does), and then proposing additional conditons.  In their words:

"The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
General Public License (GPL)".

The moment you make that statement, anything else you say by way of
additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot.
0
Harry
1/20/2004 5:50:42 AM
Harry George writes:
> What you have described is a valid use of GPL -- referencing and
> extending.  That is not the same as claiming you are using the GPL (as
> MySQL does), and then proposing additional conditons.  In their words:

> "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
> General Public License (GPL)".

I see no evidence that MySQL proposes any additional conditions.
-- 
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
0
John
1/20/2004 2:38:49 PM
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:54:59 +0000 wrote Roger Leigh
<${roger}@invalid.whinlatter.uklinux.net.invalid> in
comp.os.linux.development.apps with
<87k73n1zos.fsf@wrynose.whinlatter.uklinux.net>

>I installed PostgreSQL for personal use.  A multi-user DB can always
>work with just a single user!

And it has the advantage, of already having that feature when your project
grows beyond what you anticipated. Which projects tend to do. :)

-- 
Gerhard Gruber
Maintainer of
SoftICE for Linux - http://pice.sourceforge.net/
Fast application launcher - http://sourceforge.net/projects/launchmenu
0
Gerhard
1/20/2004 9:05:10 PM
On 19 Jan 2004 21:50:42 -0800, Harry George wrote:
> 
>  From the GPL: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim
>  copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed."
> 
>  What you have described is a valid use of GPL -- referencing and
>  extending.  That is not the same as claiming you are using the GPL
>  (as MySQL does), and then proposing additional conditons.  In their
>  words:
> 
>  "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
>  General Public License (GPL)".
> 
>  The moment you make that statement, anything else you say by way of
>  additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot.

You seem to be under a mistaken impression that a copyright owner can
only release a work under a single license.  While MySQL releases their
database under the GPL, they also release it under a commercial license
for those entities who would rather pay money for it than open their own
software.  This is not "proposing additional conditons" to the GPL.  It
is releasing it under a separate license entirely.

- W. Citoan
-- 
"Of course power tools and alcohol don't mix.  Everyone knows power tools aren't
soluble in alcohol..."
-- Crazy Nigel
0
W
1/21/2004 3:20:12 AM
"W. Citoan" <wcitoan@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> writes:

> On 19 Jan 2004 21:50:42 -0800, Harry George wrote:
> > 
> >  From the GPL: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim
> >  copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed."
> > 
> >  What you have described is a valid use of GPL -- referencing and
> >  extending.  That is not the same as claiming you are using the GPL
> >  (as MySQL does), and then proposing additional conditons.  In their
> >  words:
> > 
> >  "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the GNU
> >  General Public License (GPL)".
> > 
> >  The moment you make that statement, anything else you say by way of
> >  additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot.
> 
> You seem to be under a mistaken impression that a copyright owner can
> only release a work under a single license.  While MySQL releases their
> database under the GPL, they also release it under a commercial license
> for those entities who would rather pay money for it than open their own
> software.  This is not "proposing additional conditons" to the GPL.  It
> is releasing it under a separate license entirely.
> 
> - W. Citoan
> -- 
> "Of course power tools and alcohol don't mix.  Everyone knows power tools aren't
> soluble in alcohol..."
> -- Crazy Nigel

My comments were in response to C. Browne claiming that one *must* use
the commecial license, and that GPL alone could not be used as is.
0
Harry
1/21/2004 8:03:25 AM
On 21 Jan 2004 00:03:25 -0800, Harry George wrote:
>  "W. Citoan" <wcitoan@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> writes:
> 
> > On 19 Jan 2004 21:50:42 -0800, Harry George wrote:
> > > 
> > >  What you have described is a valid use of GPL -- referencing and
> > >  extending.  That is not the same as claiming you are using the
> > >  GPL (as MySQL does), and then proposing additional conditons.  In
> > >  their words:
> > > 
> > >  "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the
> > >  GNU General Public License (GPL)".
> > > 
> > >  The moment you make that statement, anything else you say by way
> > >  of additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot.
> > 
> > You seem to be under a mistaken impression that a copyright owner
> > can only release a work under a single license.  While MySQL
> > releases their database under the GPL, they also release it under a
> > commercial license for those entities who would rather pay money for
> > it than open their own software.  This is not "proposing additional
> > conditons" to the GPL.  It is releasing it under a separate license
> > entirely.
> 
>  My comments were in response to C. Browne claiming that one *must*
>  use the commecial license, and that GPL alone could not be used as
>  is.

That's irrelevant.  You were talking about MySQL adding conditions to
the GPL -- which is an incorrect statement.  They give you the choice of
abiding by the GPL or of purchasing a commercial license.  They aren't
adding conditions to the GPL.

Whether C. Browne statements regarding the need for the commercial
license for a particular application are right or wrong [1] has no
bearing on your claim that MySQL is adding conditions to the GPL.

  [1] It's not clear to me that he made such a claim in the first place.
  He stated, quite correctly, that if you don't abide by the GPL,
  regardless if the use is commercial or not, than you need to purchase
  the commercial license. 
  
- W. Citoan
-- 
Bombeck's Rule of Medicine:
	Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died.
0
W
1/22/2004 3:17:51 AM
"W. Citoan" <wcitoan@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> writes:

> On 21 Jan 2004 00:03:25 -0800, Harry George wrote:
> >  "W. Citoan" <wcitoan@NOSPAM-yahoo.com> writes:
> > 
> > > On 19 Jan 2004 21:50:42 -0800, Harry George wrote:
> > > > 
> > > >  What you have described is a valid use of GPL -- referencing and
> > > >  extending.  That is not the same as claiming you are using the
> > > >  GPL (as MySQL does), and then proposing additional conditons.  In
> > > >  their words:
> > > > 
> > > >  "The software from MySQL AB listed below is licensed under the
> > > >  GNU General Public License (GPL)".
> > > > 
> > > >  The moment you make that statement, anything else you say by way
> > > >  of additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot.
> > > 
> > > You seem to be under a mistaken impression that a copyright owner
> > > can only release a work under a single license.  While MySQL
> > > releases their database under the GPL, they also release it under a
> > > commercial license for those entities who would rather pay money for
> > > it than open their own software.  This is not "proposing additional
> > > conditons" to the GPL.  It is releasing it under a separate license
> > > entirely.
> > 
> >  My comments were in response to C. Browne claiming that one *must*
> >  use the commecial license, and that GPL alone could not be used as
> >  is.
> 
> That's irrelevant.  You were talking about MySQL adding conditions to
> the GPL -- which is an incorrect statement.  They give you the choice of
> abiding by the GPL or of purchasing a commercial license.  They aren't
> adding conditions to the GPL.
> 
> Whether C. Browne statements regarding the need for the commercial
> license for a particular application are right or wrong [1] has no
> bearing on your claim that MySQL is adding conditions to the GPL.
> 
>   [1] It's not clear to me that he made such a claim in the first place.
>   He stated, quite correctly, that if you don't abide by the GPL,
>   regardless if the use is commercial or not, than you need to purchase
>   the commercial license. 
>   
> - W. Citoan
> -- 
> Bombeck's Rule of Medicine:
> 	Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died.

Here's what started the exchange:
>>From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
>>Subject: Re: Open Source Database as an Alternative MS Access?
>>Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.apps
>>Date: 18 Jan 2004 22:58:58 GMT
>>It's nearly $300 more expensive than MS Access.  $495 versus $229.
>>
>>After all, if you aren't planning to release your code under the GPL,
>>the vendor expects you to purchase commercial licenses for MySQL(tm).

That is not the same as abiding by the GPL.  GPL does not require you
to do anything to code which is not bound to the licensed code.  MySQL
is accessed by sockets, not by library binding, so it is irrelevant
what you do to or with some other code.  (As I write this I realize
there may be MySQL client libraries which are being bound -- in which
case I'm off base.  But as long as the client is using its own code to
access the socket, the argument holds.)

I was saying that C. Browne was interpreting the MySQL position as
adding conditions to the GPL.  Thus the "anything else you say by way
of additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot" refers
to his interpretation, not the actual MySQL popsition.
0
Harry
1/22/2004 8:20:39 AM
On 22 Jan 2004 00:20:39 -0800, Harry George wrote:
> 
>  I was saying that C. Browne was interpreting the MySQL position as
>  adding conditions to the GPL.  Thus the "anything else you say by way
>  of additional conditions (in areas covered by the GPL) is moot"
>  refers to his interpretation, not the actual MySQL popsition.

If that is what you meant, then we are agreement.  However that was not
clear to me from what you posted.  The statement you quoted above
("anything else...") was not made in reply to Browne's post.  It was
made in reply to John Hasler's post.

- W. Citoan
-- 
I can read your mind, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
0
W
1/23/2004 12:16:42 AM
Reply: