[something happened to this post and I am reposting it]
It was suggested by Monty that the posts I've made about MariaDB
are for publicity. This simply isn't true. I would have much
preferred a different outcome in my interactions with MariaDB. I
figured that they would end up giving me a hard time, and I'd be
stubborn and we'd both hate each other for as long as I could
keep from leaving. A quick separation actually seems much better
in such context. Regardless, I would have preferred to speak
amicably to the MariaDB Corporation about switching the license
back, or at least moving to the new license at the time of the
notification of the community, ie, changing the license so that
bug fixes for 1.3.4 were not mingled with new 2.0 features.
It could have been easily possible to have a 1.3.5 release that
fixes the major bugs in 1.3 and then release a new set of
features as 2.0. This would have been at least reasonable, but by …
OPEN SOURCE IS ABOUT BEING OPEN NOT JUST ABOUT SOURCE CODE.
MariaDB makes changes to the storage engine API without even
consulting the mailing list. In fact, some MariaDB replication
features don't work with TokuDB because a new storage engine API
call is required, and this call requires functionality that might
not exist in all engines, that is, the engine must be able to
convert a transaction id into a THD object. No API is provided by
the SE to make this translation. MariaDB must communicate changes
to the storage API to the public so that the public can ensure
that tools made to work with MariaDB continue to work with
MariaDB. It doesn't matter that TokuDB is made by a competitor.
In a foreign language article, Kaj recently said MariaDB is more
open than Oracle because it includes many storage engines. This
is a crappy argument. MariaDB is trying to say they are better
than Oracle because they profit more from including code they
didn't …
I wrote last year about the way Google’s Android mobile operating system was serving as a more open alternative to Apple’s iOS, but not so open that it didn’t leave opportunity for an even more open alternative.
Given that we continue to see software patent-based attacks on Android, as well as swirling FUD around coverage of the attacks and never ending suits and settlements and courtroom developments, it is clear it will be a long time before any of this legal business is ever close to settled, unless ended by settlements first, which is likely.
However, I’m more interested in the technology in the meantime. I also think it’s interesting to see, if not a ‘more open’ …
[Read more]|
When I joined MySQL in 2006, after several profitable years as a consultant, I had a dream. I wanted to improve the product that had contributed to my professional success. The first thing that I learned when I started the uphill task is that it was far more difficult than expected. MySQL called itself open source, but the development practices were for all practical purposes closed source. At the same time, I found that MySQL, below the surface, is an organization with complex and well oiled engineering practices. Indeed, opening up the cathedral, as Lenz put it, was a hard nut to crack. We had a closed source revision control system, and our developers loved it so much, that any proposal to change it was met with strong opposition. We discussed technical matters behind the firewall. Our … |
|
When I joined MySQL in 2006, after several profitable years as a consultant, I had a dream. I wanted to improve the product that had contributed to my professional success. The first thing that I learned when I started the uphill task is that it was far more difficult than expected. MySQL called itself open source, but the development practices were for all practical purposes closed source. At the same time, I found that MySQL, below the surface, is an organization with complex and well oiled engineering practices. Indeed, opening up the cathedral, as Lenz put it, was a hard nut to crack. We had a closed source revision control system, and our developers loved it so much, that any proposal to change it was met with strong opposition. We discussed technical matters behind the firewall. Our … |
|
When I joined MySQL in 2006, after several profitable years as a consultant, I had a dream. I wanted to improve the product that had contributed to my professional success. The first thing that I learned when I started the uphill task is that it was far more difficult than expected. MySQL called itself open source, but the development practices were for all practical purposes closed source. At the same time, I found that MySQL, below the surface, is an organization with complex and well oiled engineering practices. Indeed, opening up the cathedral, as Lenz put it, was a hard nut to crack. We had a closed source revision control system, and our developers loved it so much, that any proposal to change it was met with strong opposition. We discussed technical matters behind the firewall. Our … |