A healthy open source project is a little like a chemical reaction and requires three key elements:

1. Users

This sounds funny, but some open source projects forget that they need users. They're written by developers based on their notions of how software "should" be, instead of for users based on what they need. The result is that funny-looking "who came up with this?" kind of a look.

This might make writing the software easier or more enjoyable for the developer, but long term it is foolish. Users are the raw material of an open source project. In one way or the other, they ultimately support the developers, whether by hiring the developers as employees or service providers or providing a pool of potential contributors and developers down the road.

2. Developers

But if there are only users, then an open source project would develop at a glacially slow pace. Projects that …

(define luhn-check
  (lambda (ccn)
    (define csum 0)
    (define num 0)

    (do ((i (string-length ccn) (- i 1)))
      ((<= i 0) (print csum))

      (set! num (string->number (substring ccn (- i 1) i)))
      (if (> (modulo i 2) 0)
                        (begin

                         (set! num ( * 2 num))
                         (if (> num 9) (set! num (- num 9)))))

      (set! csum (+ num csum))
      )))
;; test case
(luhn-check “4561261212345467″)

And here is implemented with MySQL.

So I'm not going to claim to be Kevin Closson - because I'm not. I'm also not going to wade into a shared-nothing vs. shared-storage architecture debate. And here's why: there is no right answer.

As with anything else, it comes down to what you want to do. Look at what Kevin says in his very long-windedly (yet nicely) titled:
Nearly Free or Not, GridSQL for EnterpriseDB is Simply Better Than Real Application Clusters. It is Shared-Nothing Architecture After All! « Kevin Closson?s Oracle Blog: Platform, Storage & Clustering Topics Related to Oracle Databases

Folks, today?s applications are built on large numbers of tables and complex joins. The reason shared-nothing is nothing like RAC is because instead of only …

I’m trying to work through the talk I gave, and give further notes, so I can then move on to other topics as they arise.

Briefly, then, late me state the obvious: Oracle and MySQL are different. Different products, with different philosophies (closed vs open source), different communities, and different support.

Oracle wants to be it all - database, app server, middleware, OS; everything. MySQL wants to be database software. Thank goodness for me - I’m a DBA because I like databases.

The communities are different. In Oracle-world, the best people like “Ask Tom” (OK, Tom Kyte), Jonathan Lewis, and the other Oak Table guys are trying to demystify the magic for us; we’re trying to understand what’s in the black box. In MySQL, everyone can read the code, and I’ve found that a lot of people are very knowledgeable about it and want to share their knowledge. They can all read (or write) the code. You can too.

I just read a fascinating article on clustering architectures for databases from Kevin Closson of Polyserve (now HP). Kevin, for those of you who don’t know him, is a Golden God, at least according to StorageMojo Robin Harris, but all I can say is that he has one of the most informed and incisive views [...]

we managed to let a pretty significant regression sneak through in 3.51.18, so we?ve turned out a quick release of mysql connector/odbc 3.51.19. sorry for the hassle.

Linuxworld has a thought-provoking interview with Linus Torvalds that is a must-read. Linus is always interesting, but this one is particularly valuable because he addresses the role of commercial interests in making Linux better. He also talks about his personal motivations - financial and otherwise - and suggests:

The thing is, being a good programmer actually pays pretty well; being acknowledged as being world-class pays even better....So I think I would have missed the opportunity of my lifetime if I had not made Linux widely available [rather than made it proprietary and built a company around it].

So, if you marry the wide adoption of open source with the talents of a Linus Torvalds and the commercial interests of a Red Hat or MySQL …

Hubert Depesz Lubaczewski has published the 57th edition of Log Buffer, the weekly review of database blogs, on </depesz>. Next week, J.Pipes will do LB#58, and #59 will appear on Chen Shapira’s I?m just a simple DBA…. To join the roll with these and other intrepid (!) LB editor-publishers, contact the Log Buffer admin. Hubert Depesz [...]

There has been some discussion about MySQL's recent moves to clarify the targeting between MySQL Community Server & MySQL Enterprise Server. Essentially, MySQL wants to make it clear(er) that Community Server is free and for those of us who are willing to "spend time to save money". Community Server is the version that will be made available to Linux distros and passed on to customers that use MySQL inside of their Linux distro without support. Enterprise server is for paying customers; those of you willing to "spend money to save time". The source for Enterprise Server will no longer be... READ MORE

Kaj wrote about changes in the Enterprise and Community offering from MySQL AB - by the way, I still don't understand why the Community VP delivers these announcements rather than a company press release. A Community VP's blog can't be the official publication channel of a PR department, can it?

I think Jeremy Cole summarises the issue very well. Important promises for the community ecosystem were not delivered. This is a great pity.

And no longer making the source tarballs of the Enterprise version publically available... come on. This should have been done from the start (and that's not even a 20-20 hindsight statement ;-) It's been blatantly obvious, really. It would have made sense, and is a perfectly valid choice under the GPL. Didn't …