maria-developers team mailing list archive

[Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Arjen Lentz <arjen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Henrik> Sorry to be a nitpick, but since this touches source code and not
>> just
>> Henrik> build stuff...
>
> Does that even matter, it's part of the same?
>
> I actually got build-related scripts out of Sun/MySQL under GPL that were
> kept internal, because there was the simple case that I wasn't otherwise
> able to rebuild binaries from the provided source. IIRC it was some Solaris
> foo.

As far as I can see, it isn't a disaster if build scripts are just GPL.

I actually hadn't thought of the fact that GPL requires also build
scripts to be available. Otoh, the opposite is not true: if we wanted
to relicense MariaDB under any other license (open source or the MySQL
OEM/proprietary license), it wouldn't be a disaster if build scripts
remained GPL for eternity.

But now that you brought it up, would you mind assigning also the
build stuff under MCA :-)

>> Henrik> Arjen, could you please clarify the terms under which this fix are
>> Henrik> contributed to Monty Program (since we've discussed this earlier
>> Henrik> today, I'll omit the reasoning why this is necessary).
>> Henrik>  -MCA (needs to be signed and faxed/emailed)
>> Henrik>  -BSD (needs to be stated in the patch or email, etc...)
>> Henrik> or
>> Henrik> ...for this particular two liner fix, do you agree (please reply)
>> that
>> Henrik> it does not constitute a copyrightable "work" in itself? (I don't
>>
>> Henrik, in general you are right. However, for a few lines bug fix
>> "that is obvious", one generally don't need a copyright assignment.
>
> Even if it were not obvious, such small patches are not generally considered
> original work and thus don't acquire their own copyright.
> This differs per country, by the way, just to be fun - it's not fixed at
> what point a patch becomes an original work.
>
> Anyway I regarded it as trivial and therefore I just submitted it.

Thanks. I just wanted you to agree on that. (But maybe in general, you
will contribute enough to make it worthwile to do the SCA.)

> I think you want to be rather "careful" in chasing this kind of thing - on
> the one hand I appreciate that you want to keep the IP clear and proper, but
> on the other hand you don't want to make it tedious for potential
> contributors to the project to actually do that. The more legalese and
> hoops, the fewer we'll see.

Yes, and any advice on the proper way to do this is welcome. Even so,
the necessity of keeping doing it will not go away, at least not short
term :-(

I think this time it was good to do even for a one liner, just to make
sure everyone agrees. In the future, if there ever are any questions,
we can point to this discussion as proof that there is consensus on
small bugfixes.

>> That said, Arjen would you mind either signing the MCA to ensure that
>> we can get your fixes in without a hazzle or do you prefer to always
>> give your changes to MariaDB under the BSD?
>
>
> So is there a "finished" MCA ?  Wasn't there still an open thread with some
> things to do?
> I'm happy to take a look at it.

http://askmonty.org/wiki/index.php/MCA

This is finished and I think apart from one changed sentence is
identical to the SCA.

The thing we are still working on with Monty is an additional
assurance from MP to you, which we want to do, but it will be a
separate text, not in the MCA itself. (And nothing you need to sign.
...or even care about, if you don't care.)


> I'm ok with pooling copyright, but I'm less ok with any construct that
> enables dual licensing, specifically I don't feel like supporting
> Sun/MySQL's continued ability to conduct their sales scam. Now, I see my
> contributions to be primarily benefiting MariaDB not MySQL (plus I doubt
> significant things will flow upstream - although pigs might fly) so I can
> probably live with signing an MP MCA.

To be clear: It may be unlikely, but from the MP side we are keeping
all options open, it is just Sun that currently doesn't want stuff
from MariaDB. One of the reasons to pool copyrights is indeed to keep
the door open for potential reconciliation with MySQL. Imho this would
be nice to those MySQL users who indeed cannot use MariaDB under the
GPL. (But there are also other reasons.)

And we do understand the trust inherent in being the body to pool the
copyrights and will do our best to be worthy of that trust!

henrik


-- 
email: henrik.ingo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
tel:   +358-40-5697354
www:   www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo
book:  www.openlife.cc