https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-September/msg0116... A decision was made back in 2005 not to include FreeTDS in Fedora Extras. The decision's reasoning rested on faulty logic. I am not an RH user or developer; I'm the FreeTDS maintainer. I would like to clear up the misunderstanding today and request FreeTDS be included in some way in the Fedora distribution. The above cited message suggests FreeTDS is under a legal cloud. The facts are: 1. The TDS protocol has been public information for many years. 2. Microsoft's patent 5,974,416, mentioned above, does not apply. 3. Microsoft and Sybase are well aware of FreeTDS and have never suggested any kind of infringement exists. 4. FreeTDS serves the business interests of both vendors. Sybase's document (http://www.sybase.com/content/1040983/Sybase-tds38-102306.pdf ) is freely downloadable. It is marked "confidential", true, but it has continuously been published on their website for several years, so any confidentiality is surely now minimal. The mere fact that something is so marked, in any case, has no legal import. Nothing else in the document suggests its use is in any way restricted. The assertion that FreeTDS violates the LGPL license that governs its use is incorrect. The TDS protocol is not covered by any patent. http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsrchnum.htm&... Microsoft's patent 5,974,416 does not mention and does not describe TDS. It issued in 1999, 15 years after Sybase invented TDS, perhaps five years after Microsoft licensed it from Sybase, and two years after FreeTDS was first released. Yes, the patent has words like "tabular" and "data" and "stream" in it. No, TDS does not have any of an "Advanced Data TableGram (ADTG) format", a "HandlerOptions section", or a "Descriptors section". There is no "Descriptors section [that] comprises a 16-byte unique identifier." In short, the patent describes something similar to TDS that the inexpert reader might be led to believe is the same thing, but which in fact specifically avoids language that describes TDS. This should come as no surprise: Sybase surely would object to having its protocol patented by Microsoft. One might even suggest the USPTO would object, too. The assertion in a reply "There are 4 versions of TDS: 4.2, 5.0, 7.0, and 8.0. MS bought TDS 4.2 from Sybase. Only Sybase uses 5.0, and only MS uses 7.0 and 8.0." is true but unimportant. These flavors of the protocol are much more similar than different. Only a small part of FreeTDS distinguishes between them. The features Microsoft added are limited to a few new datatypes, the use of UCS2 encoding for metadata, and some minor annoyances. No one would plausibly claim that TDS 7.0 represents an invention of any kind, much less a protocol distinct from its predecessors in any but the most technical way. The FreeTDS project has been contacted by parties at Microsoft from time to time. Discussion at one point led to how Microsoft might support the project in some way. If patent violations were at issue -- which clearly they can't be -- surely those who opened the discussion with us would have been warned off. In the end, though, nothing came of it; they would have required a nondisclosure agreement no one on the project was interested in signing. (IMO the LGPL was the real stumbling block.) http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb497057.aspx Finally, a Google search for "freetds site:microsoft.com" quickly shows that Microsoft actively supports FreeTDS to a surprising degree. Microsoft makes no Unix drivers of any kind. I do not think I have to explain how Microsoft benefits from the existence of a free driver connecting Apache/PHP sites (to cite just one example) to their database product. The facts are all on one side: the documentation, the patent language, the age and history of TDS, and the vendors' behavior and interests all tell us that TDS is completely, absolutely unencumbered. It cannot be patented or copyrighted, and it is obviously not a trade secret. It doesn't even stand vaguely *accused* of violating patents. FreeTDS is, simply, free software. I wish the Fedora project would accept and treat it accordingly. Thank you for your time. Regards, --jkl

On Thu, 2007-05-31 at 14:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Thanks for your long mail! > > Notice that freetds is currently in livna already, but having it in > Fedora > proper would be advantagous for packages like libgda (which could then > support) > tds) and php-freetds > > This gets a +1 from me. > > Spot, does this need to go through RH-legal, or can you ok it? I'm still not happy about the only available standards document being marked confidential, but I'm convinced there is no patent concern. This should be fine to move to Fedora. James, thanks for the clarifications. ~spot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Well, I'll begin the moving (submit for review etc.) in coming week. Additionally, I'll handle php-mssql stuff too.