Topic: SFC 4 Project

[FA Frey XC]

Alot of this is still to be determined.

Likely, if SQL support is included (which I intend it to be) then it will be set for MySQL.

This is still to be determined, as are so many other things.

Regards,

[marstone]

Alot of this is still to be determined.

Likely, if SQL support is included (which I intend it to be) then it will be set for MySQL.

This is still to be determined, as are so many other things.

Regards,

Hopefully as people voice support for things they shall be added to the long list.  SQL is just one of the things that make alot of sense to support.

Oh and Frey, thanks for all you have been doing for the comunity.  I have had some wishes for some things, but understand the constrants you have to work with.

[Nemesis]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

[marstone]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

And since MySQL is crossplatform it keeps the door open for later.  Even if just the server kit is made to run on other platforms.

[FA Frey XC]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

The answer to that question is yes.

MS has , and I am sure will always provide a free copy of their SQL server for public use.

The difference? It will only run on a single CPU , virtual or physical.

Regards,

[toasty0]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

If cross platform compatibility is a concern to the development group, it will mean they will have to develop two, three, or more executables for those who wish to host/play on other platforms. That is a lot to ask of volunteers whose plate will be full enough hacking out the windows compatible executable.

[toasty0]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

The answer to that question is yes.

MS has , and I am sure will always provide a free copy of their SQL server for public use.

The difference? It will only run on a single CPU , virtual or physical.

Regards,

Frey is correct. Prior to SQL 2005 there was MSDE. With the release of SQL 2005 there is SQL 2005Express. It is limited in a lot of way, but unless there is something I am unaware of with reagrds to the Server Kits (like a need for clustering or mirroring) the Express edition could very easily fill back end needs.

[marstone]

If cross platform compatibility is a concern to the development group, it will mean they will have to develop two, three, or more executables for those who wish to host/play on other platforms. That is a lot to ask of volunteers whose plate will be full enough hacking out the windows compatible executable.

Well, somewhat true.  You will have multiple executables, but they can all come from the same source code if written correctly for crossplatform compiles.  Crossplatform doesn't always mean a ton of more work, mainly working towards that goal from the start.  A few #defines and pulling machine specific code into seperate modules.  Good planning can save alot of work.

[toasty0]

If cross platform compatibility is a concern to the development group, it will mean they will have to develop two, three, or more executables for those who wish to host/play on other platforms. That is a lot to ask of volunteers whose plate will be full enough hacking out the windows compatible executable.

Well, somewhat true.  You will have multiple executables, but they can all come from the same source code if written correctly for crossplatform compiles.  Crossplatform doesn't always mean a ton of more work, mainly working towards that goal from the start.  A few #defines and pulling machine specific code into seperate modules.  Good planning can save alot of work.

I hope that there will be those who wish to create exe for Mac, or Linux, and are given the opportunity. 

[marstone]

If cross platform compatibility is a concern to the development group, it will mean they will have to develop two, three, or more executables for those who wish to host/play on other platforms. That is a lot to ask of volunteers whose plate will be full enough hacking out the windows compatible executable.

Well, somewhat true.  You will have multiple executables, but they can all come from the same source code if written correctly for crossplatform compiles.  Crossplatform doesn't always mean a ton of more work, mainly working towards that goal from the start.  A few #defines and pulling machine specific code into seperate modules.  Good planning can save alot of work.

I hope that there will be those who wish to create exe for Mac, or Linux, and are given the opportunity. 

Same here, some proper coding can have it run DirectX for Windows, and when compiled it can pull in OpenGL for the other systems (or just use OpenGL for all, but DirectX does have some advantages in the windows side, but would add more coding to double it up)

[Nemesis]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

The answer to that question is yes.

MS has , and I am sure will always provide a free copy of their SQL server for public use.

The difference? It will only run on a single CPU , virtual or physical.

Regards

The limits on MS SQL are the best reason to use MySQL.

After what they did with PlaysForSure I wouldn't want to count on them keeping anything going if there isn't money in it.

[toasty0]

Is this a for sure. MS SQL comes in a free flavor as well  which is the reson for my question.

If it is on MS SQL you limit the platforms that people can choose to run it on compared to using MySQL.  Also can you be sure that there will always be a free version of MS SQL? 

As long as MySQL is opensource it can be kept available even if the project were to shutdown.  Since it was released under the GPL those versions will always be open even if Sun were to take later versions totally proprietary.

The answer to that question is yes.

MS has , and I am sure will always provide a free copy of their SQL server for public use.

The difference? It will only run on a single CPU , virtual or physical.

Regards

The limits on MS SQL are the best reason to use MySQL.

After what they did with PlaysForSure I wouldn't want to count on them keeping anything going if there isn't money in it.

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

[Rod ONeal]

What would make MS SQL a better choice?

[marstone]

What would make MS SQL a better choice?

If it was cross-platform.  If nothing else it would be nice to have the server be able to run on most platforms.

[Nemesis]

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

1/ Compatibility with future versions of Windows.  Not everyone will have old versions of Windows to run obsolete software

2/ Patching security flaws (or any flaw for that matter) that might arise after support was dropped.

3/ Acquisition. Does the MS license allow for distribution by others?  If not then someone who wanted to run a server after MS stopped distribution would have the choice of illegally acquaint one or not running a server.  The same applies to someone who had a legal copy but had it destroyed or lost in some fashion.

[toasty0]

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

1/ Compatibility with future versions of Windows.  Not everyone will have old versions of Windows to run obsolete software

2/ Patching security flaws (or any flaw for that matter) that might arise after support was dropped.

3/ Acquisition. Does the MS license allow for distribution by others?  If not then someone who wanted to run a server after MS stopped distribution would have the choice of illegally acquaint one or not running a server.  The same applies to someone who had a legal copy but had it destroyed or lost in some fashion.

1.) Doesn't wash.
2.) Isn't that what is being done here is the team is trying to develop SFC4? I see their work in part as trying to adopt and extend legacy software (Q3) to run on future versions of windows and extend it to embrace other OSs?
3.) Let's hope that the development team has the foresight/and or time to write the application in such a manner that future versions of the database application can be implemented with as little recompiling of exe as possible. But, no matter which base SQL Server solution is chosen, it is going to age and will need to be updated and modernized.

[marstone]

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

1/ Compatibility with future versions of Windows.  Not everyone will have old versions of Windows to run obsolete software

2/ Patching security flaws (or any flaw for that matter) that might arise after support was dropped.

3/ Acquisition. Does the MS license allow for distribution by others?  If not then someone who wanted to run a server after MS stopped distribution would have the choice of illegally acquaint one or not running a server.  The same applies to someone who had a legal copy but had it destroyed or lost in some fashion.

1.) Doesn't wash.
2.) Isn't that what is being done here is the team is trying to develop SFC4? I see their work in part as trying to adopt and extend legacy software (Q3) to run on future versions of windows and extend it to embrace other OSs?
3.) Let's hope that the development team has the foresight/and or time to write the application in such a manner that future versions of the database application can be implemented with as little recompiling of exe as possible. But, no matter which base SQL Server solution is chosen, it is going to age and will need to be updated and modernized.

all three of your points link into one thing.  MS SQL is released for use, but not the source code.  Thus is they drop support for the free version.
1) as windows come out with new versions it is possible it will not work with it.
2) We can't update it without the source code
3) Following the coding specs of the SQL package will mostly illiminate the need for updating or moderizing the source, as you just install the newer version of SQL that is being maintained by someone else and you are up to date.  If some of the coding specs change then you will have to update the software to handle that.

[toasty0]

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

1/ Compatibility with future versions of Windows.  Not everyone will have old versions of Windows to run obsolete software

2/ Patching security flaws (or any flaw for that matter) that might arise after support was dropped.

3/ Acquisition. Does the MS license allow for distribution by others?  If not then someone who wanted to run a server after MS stopped distribution would have the choice of illegally acquaint one or not running a server.  The same applies to someone who had a legal copy but had it destroyed or lost in some fashion.

1.) Doesn't wash.
2.) Isn't that what is being done here is the team is trying to develop SFC4? I see their work in part as trying to adopt and extend legacy software (Q3) to run on future versions of windows and extend it to embrace other OSs?
3.) Let's hope that the development team has the foresight/and or time to write the application in such a manner that future versions of the database application can be implemented with as little recompiling of exe as possible. But, no matter which base SQL Server solution is chosen, it is going to age and will need to be updated and modernized.

all three of your points link into one thing.  MS SQL is released for use, but not the source code.  Thus is they drop support for the free version.
1) as windows come out with new versions it is possible it will not work with it.
2) We can't update it without the source code
3) Following the coding specs of the SQL package will mostly illiminate the need for updating or moderizing the source, as you just install the newer version of SQL that is being maintained by someone else and you are up to date.  If some of the coding specs change then you will have to update the software to handle that.

You can't update what without the source code?

[marstone]

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

1/ Compatibility with future versions of Windows.  Not everyone will have old versions of Windows to run obsolete software

2/ Patching security flaws (or any flaw for that matter) that might arise after support was dropped.

3/ Acquisition. Does the MS license allow for distribution by others?  If not then someone who wanted to run a server after MS stopped distribution would have the choice of illegally acquaint one or not running a server.  The same applies to someone who had a legal copy but had it destroyed or lost in some fashion.

1.) Doesn't wash.
2.) Isn't that what is being done here is the team is trying to develop SFC4? I see their work in part as trying to adopt and extend legacy software (Q3) to run on future versions of windows and extend it to embrace other OSs?
3.) Let's hope that the development team has the foresight/and or time to write the application in such a manner that future versions of the database application can be implemented with as little recompiling of exe as possible. But, no matter which base SQL Server solution is chosen, it is going to age and will need to be updated and modernized.

all three of your points link into one thing.  MS SQL is released for use, but not the source code.  Thus is they drop support for the free version.
1) as windows come out with new versions it is possible it will not work with it.
2) We can't update it without the source code
3) Following the coding specs of the SQL package will mostly illiminate the need for updating or moderizing the source, as you just install the newer version of SQL that is being maintained by someone else and you are up to date.  If some of the coding specs change then you will have to update the software to handle that.

You can't update what without the source code?

The SQL if MS drops their version you are stuck with whatever it was at that time.  MySQL is opensource and has people updating it, so even if support is dropped for it, you could work on it yourself.

[toasty0]

I don't get it. Once DL-ed, what do we care what MS does about free software releases?

I can think of 5 concerns that far outweight any consideration about MS' continued support of free software releases.

1/ Compatibility with future versions of Windows.  Not everyone will have old versions of Windows to run obsolete software

2/ Patching security flaws (or any flaw for that matter) that might arise after support was dropped.

3/ Acquisition. Does the MS license allow for distribution by others?  If not then someone who wanted to run a server after MS stopped distribution would have the choice of illegally acquaint one or not running a server.  The same applies to someone who had a legal copy but had it destroyed or lost in some fashion.

1.) Doesn't wash.
2.) Isn't that what is being done here is the team is trying to develop SFC4? I see their work in part as trying to adopt and extend legacy software (Q3) to run on future versions of windows and extend it to embrace other OSs?
3.) Let's hope that the development team has the foresight/and or time to write the application in such a manner that future versions of the database application can be implemented with as little recompiling of exe as possible. But, no matter which base SQL Server solution is chosen, it is going to age and will need to be updated and modernized.

all three of your points link into one thing.  MS SQL is released for use, but not the source code.  Thus is they drop support for the free version.
1) as windows come out with new versions it is possible it will not work with it.
2) We can't update it without the source code
3) Following the coding specs of the SQL package will mostly illiminate the need for updating or moderizing the source, as you just install the newer version of SQL that is being maintained by someone else and you are up to date.  If some of the coding specs change then you will have to update the software to handle that.

You can't update what without the source code?

The SQL if MS drops their version you are stuck with whatever it was at that time.  MySQL is opensource and has people updating it, so even if support is dropped for it, you could work on it yourself.

Any SQL Admin worth his salt can upgrade to the current iteration of MS SQL any MS SQL server database and or server going back to SQL Server 6.5.  And yes, just like MS SQL, there will be sp_xx and Datatypes that will need conversion or replacement.