-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 24 February 2004 12:43, Richard Welty wrote: > by using the GPL instead of the LGPL for libraries, you effectively > drive the software with GPL'd libraries into a niche where some > (many?) businesses will decline to use it. you may see this as good > for open source, i see it as restrictive, lots of people will end up not > using it. This depends is MySQL is being used in a process or as a product. If using MySQL means your company's product must be GPL'd, this require some thought and as you say may force people down another route. However, if you are using MySQL to do your invoicing, or web ordering, or some other common process, GPL-ing that stuff may only have advantages for your company. Other people can cooperate and make a better system than you could afford to make yourself, so everyone can benefit. Since this is a 'backoffice' process anyway, it wasn't like you're losing anything by it no longer being proprietary, quite the opposite. There are already cool OSS web commerce stuff using MySQL like http://www.oscommerce.com/ for example, there are obvious advantages using that and offering patches for special features rather than starting over with a proprietary solution. Still, its interesting how the GPL is being used by MySQL to effectively devalue the default offering. - -Andy - -- Find your answer without waiting for replies.... Searchable list archives at http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fedora-list&r=1&w=2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAO0o3jKeDCxMJCTIRAmh0AJ0YtKvA8ENYZVG3K9za6aM28xP90QCfcoNp veaKPSMpJtj0VSqNrUMrfSI= =y74C -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
