[Mono-devel-list] ByteFX development

[Reggie Burnett]

> > Sorry for my rant.  As you can see, it really had very little to do
with
> > the code.  As to your argument about an ISV just staying in Windows,
I
> > think this is incorrect.  If the Linux platform has enough users and
the
> > Mono toolkit is advanced enough (both are true), then the Linux
platform
> > can easily support applications and components that use a for-pay
> > licensing system.  This is assuming, of course, that I expect to
sell
> > more than a few copies of my application or library.  If this is not
the
> > case, why not open source?
> 
> Or rather than open sourcing, why not use one of the other databases
> which have similar levels of functionality, but no weird restrictions
> on what a developer can do with their own code, which happens to have
> nothing to do with database internals?


David

Again, my argument has very little to do with MySQL and more to do with
the mindset of some (not all) open source devs.  Of course, I oppose any
weird licensing restrictions such as using the wire protocol, etc.
However, as I have illustrated, that is not the issue.  If someone is
writing open source software, you can use what MySQL produces free of
charge.  If you are trying to make money, then you have to pay MySQL.
That is simply not inappropriate.  

Some people subscribe to the idea that all software should be free (as
in beer).  The fact is that as developers, we always pay for what we
use.  We either pay in $$ for the very latest features, or we pay in
time spent implementing those features, or we pay in frustration or lack
of app polish because we are using something that is half-baked.  And
this is as it should be.  I am a software developer and enjoy selling
software for a living.  

Indeed, there are several options for open source databases and
providers and I am, by no means, saying that MySQL is the only viable
option.

-reggie