Archive for January, 2007
Linus supports DRM, do you?
By Justin Silverton
The Free Software Foundation (FSF), established in 1985, is dedicated to promoting computer users’ rights to use, study, copy, modify, and redistribute computer programs. The FSF promotes the development and use of free software, particularly the GNU operating system, used widely in its GNU/Linux variant (from the FSF Website).
In a recent (Back In July) forum posting by Linus Torvald, he discusses his views on the FSF and the GPL 3 (some of his harsher words have been removed):
“My explanation for why the GPLv3 is bad is that if you make your decisions based on fear and loathing, they will be the wrong ones.
The whole point about the changes in the GPLv3 is to be “against” something else. That’s how the FSF has always acted, and I don’t know if you remember (or ever saw) the animosity between the BSD camps and the GPL camps, but a lot of it was because of how the FSF was preaching their religion as if it was “evil” to do anything else, even with the GPLv2.
And [deleted], I’m proud of the fact that Linux helped change that mental landscape. There were other projects (and certainly other people) too, but Linux was one big part of the movement away from that horrible “us vs them” mindset.”
I agree with Linus here. I wrote an article about the badvista campaign a few weeks ago. This is an example of this type of mentality. Rather than focusing on the merits of the GPL and using open source, the negatives of the competition (IE: Microsoft) are showcased.
Here are his views on the DRM:
“Just as a very concrete example, the anti-DRM stance of the GPLv3 is not only anti-Tivo, it’s also anti-security. Exactly because it tries to make a non-technical stand on a technical issue, one that has very real impact on real behaviour.
The fact is, that signed binaries are not only a good idea, they are an integral part of pretty much any security scheme. Every time you do a “yum upgrade”, you tend to be getting a lot of binary packages that were signed with a key that you are not going to get access to, because if you had access to that key, the whole security model would break down.
So a sane person will not say “you cannot stop execution of a binary based on a key that users don’t have access to”, because a sane person realizes that this is very fundamental technology, and that it’s a technical issue, not a political one.”
I don’t agree with this stance. Digital Rights Management by itself is not a bad idea. It allows companies to protect their intellectual property, whether it’s music, movies, or any other type of digital content. The problem is that Microsoft (and other companies with the DRM in their best interest) are trying to force it on us. It may not happen all at once, but eventually, we may only be able to play DRM content on our computers and music players.
also discussed is a passage directly removed from version 2 of the license:
“And I’m trying to protect users from idiots that think that it’s a good idea to make technical choices on non-technical grounds. Notice how the GPLv2 (the good one) didn’t do that. It even made expressly clear that the act of “running” the program was not restricted in any way, shape or form.
Here’s a quote from section 0 in GPLv2 that is totally gone in version 3, and people should think long and hard about the fact that the new version is a big change in this area:
Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does.
So do me a favour, and stop talking [deleted], and start actually thinking deeper about the very fundamental changes that the GPLv3 introduces. Also, do give the people who actually wrote the code that the license is supposed to cover some respect.”
More of this thoughts can be found here
PHP+Java=Resin
By Justin Silverton
What is Resin?
The Resin® high-performance, open source application server features load balancing for increased reliability. Caucho’s Quercus(TM) is a fast, 100% Java implementation of the PHP language allowing developers to use PHP flexibility for the web interface and Java for stability.
Benefits (From Their website)
Quercus and Quercus’ PHP libraries are written entirely in Java, thereby taking the advantages of Java applications and infusing them into PHP. PHP applications running on Quercus are simply faster, easier to develop, more capable, more secure, and more scalable than any other PHP solution.
Performance - simply faster
Quercus outperforms straight mod_php by about 4x for MediaWiki and Drupal.
PHP developers can use Java tools like profilers to get in-depth information about the PHP program performance.
Development - fast, safe, and easy
PHP extensions written in Java are fast, safe, and relatively easy to develop compared to those written in C. Since Java is the library language, developers won’t need to be paranoid about third-party libraries having C-memory problems or segvs and are freed to concentrate on solving the objectives at hand.
Capability - powerful Java technologies at the developer’s fingertips
Quercus has the best of both worlds: PHP and Java. PHP applications can take advantage of Java technologies like JMS, EJB, SOA frameworks, Hibernate, and Spring.
Security - no more pesky C memory bugs
All Quercus extensions libraries are coded in Java. Therefore, developers do not have to worry about C pointer overruns and segmentation faults from PHP extensions anymore.
Scalability - PHP for the masses, literally
Thanks to Resin, PHP applications can beautifully scale to as many servers as desired.
PHP applications can now enjoy connection pooling, distributed sessions, fail-safe load balancing, and proxy caching. These benefits require no change in the PHP code.
The open source version (There is also a commercial version available) can be downloaded Here
Benchmarks
Benchmarks can be found here
PHP Apps that have been tested with Resin (and work)
- DokuWiki 2006-11-06
- Dragonfly CMS 9.0.6.1.7
- Drupal 4.7.4
- Gallery2 2.1.2
- Joomla 1.0.11
- MediaWiki 1.9
- Phorum 5.1.16a
- phpBB 2.0.21
- phpMyAdmin 2.9.1.1
- PHProjekt 5.2
- PHP-Nuke 7.9
- Wordpress 2.0.5
- Xoops 2.0.16
Conclusion - will I be switching to resin?
It is an interesting concept, but I think I will have to do some major benchmark testing before I decide to switch any of my websites to a java based php application server.
wordpress 2.1 to be released on Monday
By Justin Silverton
Wordpress 2.1 is going to be on Monday January 22nd. Here are some great new features that you will see:
Auto-save of Drafts - WordPress 2.1 adds an autosave function that is automatically implemented when writing new drafts. This functionality uses AJAX and operates without new pageloads. The title of the post must be filled out in order for autosaving to occur.
Plugin Compatibility - many plugins will no longer work in 2.1 due to deprecation of database table variables. However, whenever there is a new version of WordPress, the other possible “plugin breaks” extend farther. Fortunately, the WordPress community has been hard at work testing plugins with 2.1 determining compatibility (find out if your plugin is compatible here).
New Visual Editor Interface - A big problem (to many) in the WordPress 2.0 branch was the Rich Text Editor (RTE) powered by TinyMCE. I believe the RTE was a good idea but was before it’s time. Thankfully, the developers have heeded the concerns brought to bear on the RTE in WordPress 2.0 and have significantly improved it. Notably, there is now a tabbed interface in the Write screen that will allow bloggers to switch between the two views seamlessly.
More information on this can be found here.
Mysql will still offer windows binaries
By Justin Silverton
In a recent article, I wrote about how mysql will no longer provide binaries for windows. This isn’t true. In a recent article Here, the full story is explained:
“Contrary to some reports in the community, MySQL will continue providing binaries both for Windows and other operating systems. All our download pages, including those for MySQL 5.0, have binaries today, and will continue to have them.
The source-only releases we introduced with 5.0.33 (and will continue to provide in the future)are just in addition to the binary-and-source releases. The current latest binary-and-source MySQL Community Server release is 5.0.27, and I expect MySQL 5.0.35 Community Server to be released as binary-and-source within a month, both for Windows and our other platforms. This is as we always planned it, and tried to communicate it. I am sorry our communication has not been clear enough. “
Here is part of the original post/announcement: “We refer to our reference manual, especially the chapter 2.4.14. MySQL Installation Using a Source Distribution when it comes to building MySQL Community Server. At the same time, I want to point out that the service of providing MySQL Enterprise Server binaries is something we do for our paying customers, in the form of the MySQL Enterprise Server subscription, starting at 595 dollars a year”
The Enterprise edition of mysql will not have the binaries available without purchase, but the community edition will still have the latest source and binaries available in future releases. Also of note is that the next release of the mysl community edition that will have binaries available is 5.0.35.
no more mysql binaries?
By Justin silverton
In a recent decision by the people over at mysql, the latest community (Open source) edition of the database system will no longer be available for download in binary form (it looks like both windows and linux binaries are still on 5.27 and the lastest is 5.33). This means that if you want to use the latest version, you will have to have the following installed on your system to first compile it from source:
- Visual Studio .Net 2003 (7.1) compiler system
- Between 3GB and 5GB disk space.
- Windows XP, Windows 2000 or higher.
Another interesting statement found here says the following:
“Providing and verifying binaries is a paid-for service for those who want to spent money to save time”
It looks like if you want the official binaries, you need to pay to download them. It appears that mysql is starting to make it harder and harder to use their software without paying a licensing fee.