Vote tallying...

Chris Angelico rosuav at
Sat Jan 19 03:00:48 CET 2013

On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Kushal Kumaran
<kushal.kumaran+python at> wrote:
> Chris Angelico <rosuav at> writes:
>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Ben Finney <ben+python at> wrote:
>>> * MySQL's development has suffered under Sun, and become virtually
>>>   moribund under Oracle. They operate as a closed shop, occasionally
>>>   tossing GPL-licensed releases over the wall, with very little input
>>>   accepted from the community.
>> I don't know whether it's a legit concern or pure FUD, but it's been
>> suggested that since the MySQL license is GPL and not LGPL, any code
>> that links against it is forced to be GPL too. I'm not sure how far
>> that goes (eg if you're using it from Python, at what point does it
>> stop being "code linked to GPL code" and start being a discrete
>> system), and IANAL, but I prefer to work with systems with more
>> freedom in their licensing. PostgreSQL is under a BSD-like license, so
>> it can be used without issues.
> Oracle have a page about this:

Thanks, I was working from memory and wasn't sure. So yes, it's a
fully legit issue, and it basically means you can't use MySQL with any
proprietary code.

So if I create a thin wrapper around libmysql, release that wrapper
under the BSD 2-clause license (which is listed among the valid
licenses - at least, I'm guessing that they mean the 2-clause), and
then use that wrapper in a proprietary project, is that valid? This is
getting ridiculously messy, and I'm definitely glad now not using
MySQL at work.

> As far as python goes, there are at least two pure-python
> implementations of the mysql protocol available:
> - (MIT license)

That should be perfectly legal then. You're not linking against any
GPL'd code, you're just connecting via a TCP socket to a GPL
application. Really, I don't see what GPLing the client library
achieves, other than creating a mess for people.


More information about the Python-list mailing list