Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Work on SQLite4 has concluded

sqlite.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 161 posts

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#111

Post by hnarn »

ktta wrote: post #54
jbarham wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/prosupport.html

>SQLite License. Warranty of title and perpetual right-to-use for the SQLite source code. Obtaining A License To Use SQLite Even though SQLite is in the public domain and does not require a license, some users want to obtain a license anyway. Some reasons for obtaining a license include: Your company desires warranty of title and/or indemnity against claims of copyright infringement. You are using SQLite in a jurisdi…

>How is it possible that they can sell licenses to the code that was put into the public domain by other contributors?

"Public domain" does not mean: this has to be free, nobody can ask for money.

"Public domain" means: noone has the right to stop anyone else from doing what they want.

The same is true for things like the Mona Lisa. You can snap a photo of it (that photo may or may not be copyrightable, depends on the country, meaning you may also "steal" someone elses photo if applicable), print posters and sell them. This is possible because the intellectual property is in the public domain. It doesn't mean you have to give your posters away for free. You can even charge people to look at your photo -- disregarding the fact that noone probably would pay.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#112

Post by ktta »

hnarn wrote: post #111
ktta wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>SQLite License. Warranty of title and perpetual right-to-use for the SQLite source code. Obtaining A License To Use SQLite Even though SQLite is in the public domain and does not require a license, some users want to obtain a license anyway. Some reasons for obtaining a license include: Your company desires warranty of title and/or indemnity against claims of copyright infringement. You are using SQLite in a jurisdi…

>How is it possible that they can sell licenses to the code that was put into the public domain by other contributors? "Public domain" does not mean: this has to be free, nobody can ask for money. "Public domain" means: noone has the right to stop anyone else from doing what they want. The same is true for things like the Mona Lisa. You can snap a photo of it (that photo may or may not be copyrightable, depends on th…

My question was the assertion of the ability of granting licenses in a place which doesn't recognize public domain. If the place doesn't recognize public domain, then in that place, the copyright of the code contributed by a user is still the users. So where does the company get the authority to license it?

Couldn't the person who put in into public domain go to the country and sue them saying the company is licensing their code? How can the company defend itself? We all know how it should go but that might not be what actually might happen.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#113

Post by hnarn »

ktta wrote: post #112
hnarn wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How is it possible that they can sell licenses to the code that was put into the public domain by other contributors? "Public domain" does not mean: this has to be free, nobody can ask for money. "Public domain" means: noone has the right to stop anyone else from doing what they want. The same is true for things like the Mona Lisa. You can snap a photo of it (that photo may or may not be copyrightable, depends on th…

My question was the assertion of the ability of granting licenses in a place which doesn't recognize public domain. If the place doesn't recognize public domain, then in that place, the copyright of the code contributed by a user is still the users. So where does the company get the authority to license it? Couldn't the person who put in into public domain go to the country and sue them saying the company is licensin…

>So where does the company get the authority to license it?

The company doesn't need any authority because anyone can "license" public domain software, just like I can sell you a star in the sky. It's a worthless piece of paper, its a gimmick and a way of making a donation to a cause you appreciate.

>Couldn't the person who put in into public domain go to the country and sue them saying the company is licensing their code?

Again, you're misunderstanding what public domain means. "The person" you mention has no right to sue anyone because the thing being discussed has been released into the public domain. Nobody owns it.

To illustrate: when you say (paraphrased); "The author could sue you for misusing what he/she put in the public domain" the logic doesn't hold, because if the author could to that it wouldn't be released into the public domain.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#114

Post by mrweasel »

ktta wrote: post #54
jbarham wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/prosupport.html

>SQLite License. Warranty of title and perpetual right-to-use for the SQLite source code. Obtaining A License To Use SQLite Even though SQLite is in the public domain and does not require a license, some users want to obtain a license anyway. Some reasons for obtaining a license include: Your company desires warranty of title and/or indemnity against claims of copyright infringement. You are using SQLite in a jurisdi…

>How is it possible that they can sell licenses to the code that was put into the public domain by other contributors?

Because you're required to sign a piece of paper that says: Yes, I agree to place this code in the public domain, if you want to contribute a patch to SQLite. What you're paying Hipps company for, when you buy a license, is keep records that says that all code is in fact in the public domain.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#115

Post by qznc »

RainaRelanah wrote: post #97
petre wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been using it for the last 3/4 years. It's great and really user friendly, with integrated help and a web interface - everything in a single binary. The trouble with it is that it gets slower once you have a lot of history and many files. I don't know if you can use it for huge things like the Linux kernel or the FreeBSD ports tree. I once tried to import the ports tree into fossil and gave up after 2G and an h…

To be fair, Fossil's intended use case is the exact opposite of the Linux kernel. See 3.3 and 3.4 of the fossil vs git page[0]. [0] https://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.w...

I find most of the differences listed there contrived.

One big difference is that fossil includes wiki and ticketing.

Philosophy differs: Fossil intentionally limits "distributedness". For example, fossil push/pull always transfers all branches with their name. Private branches are considered an anti-feature.

Minor differences are the licence (GPL vs BSD) and the data store (files vs sqlite). Under some circumstances these details matter, but not for the majority of developers.

The rest is not significant, imho. For example, "Lots of little tools vs stand-alone executable". Who cares? In both cases you type "$VCS $SUBCOMMAND $PARAMETERS" commands.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#116

Post by jussij »

the_common_man wrote: post #17

Anyone know how sqlite makes money?

In terms of an open source projects, they do have more than a fair share of big companies that seem to take an interest:

SQLite is developed and maintained by the SQLite Consortium, who's members include Mozilla, Adobe, Oracle and Adobe. The embedded SQL database is used in a number of well-known applications, such as Adobe's Lightroom, Apple's Mac OS X operating system and Mozilla's Firefox and Thunderbird.

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/SQLite-3-7-0-adds-Wri...

And since the link above is fairly old, I suspect since then the list of big companies supporting the project has probably grown.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#117

Post by chmaynard »

The title of this post, a true statement removed from its context, attracts readers like me because its implied meaning has considerable shock value. Of course, Dr. Hipp didn't help matters by naming his experimental fork "SQLite4".

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#118

Post by raphaelj »

sametmax wrote: post #88
hasenj wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> your normal dB driving some web-based CRUD app That can totally be handled with SQLite.

I have several crud apps running sql. With moderate write load and a good concurrency write error handling code it works very well. Good when the product size is not worth a postgres full blown setup.

I backup this. I've been using SQLite for some low to moderate load CRUD apps, and this always worked like a charm. SQLite also make backuping, testing and moving apps so much easier.

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#119

Post by rurban »

makmanalp wrote: post #56
coleifer wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm jealous you got to hear Dr. Hipp, that sounds cool. Would love to hear more about the circumstances :) Regarding the LSM engine, you can find all the relevant implementation details here: https://sqlite.org/src4/doc/trunk/www/lsm.wiki#summary > The in-memory tree is an append-only red-black tree structure used to stage user data that has not yet flushed into the database file by the system. Under normal circumsta…

I got lucky! It was a class event, and he's known to speak at databases / data systems classes. He's a very fun (and opinionated!) speaker. > The in-memory tree is an append-only red-black tree structure used to stage user data that has not yet flushed into the database file by the system. Hmm, ok, so this contradicts my assumption. Actually, now that I think about it, other LSMs like rocksdb / leveldb work like this…

This is the other perf graph: https://sqlite.org/src4/wiki?name=LsmPerformance

Re: Work on SQLite4 has concluded

#120

Post by Santosh83 »

greenhouse_gas wrote: post #104
ianamartin wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, obviously they should rewrite it in Rust.

From the canonical source (as in, [Richard Hipp]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._Richard_Hipp) ): Rewriting SQLite in Rust, or some other trendy “safe” language, would not help. In fact it might hurt. Prof. Regehr did not find problems with SQLite. He found constructs in the SQLite source code which under a strict reading of the C standards have “undefined behaviour”, which means that the compiler can generate what…

Even if Rust is at parity with C in terms of tooling and ecosystem (which it probably will be in a few short years), SQLite is probably not high on the list of software to rewrite in Rust, given its fairly high quality. Let's rewrite the vulnerability-ridden ones first.
Post reply on HN