On 28 June 2013 04:07, Paul DuBois <p...@snake.net> wrote: > > On Jun 27, 2013, at 8:56 PM, Lyle wrote: > >> On 28/06/2013 02:34, Paul DuBois wrote: >>> On Jun 27, 2013, at 8:16 PM, Lyle wrote: >>>> On 27/06/2013 22:22, Tim Bunce wrote: >>>>> If you're a DBD::mysql user and care about the future of the code, please >>>>> help out. >>>> I felt the same when I came across this during my research. I didn't have >>>> a great deal of luck in my initial efforts to reach out. It seems like >>>> Oracle/MySQL have lost a lot of interested in DBD::mysql (hence my post >>>> about this a couple of months back). >>> Wait. >>> >>> That thread was about your belief that Oracle was trying to distance itself >>> from DBD::mysql or discourage its development. >> >> Maybe I should have worded it better. The post was more to pose a question >> than state a belief. When I looked at the RT queue I saw the same issues >> that Tim has brought up now. The POD itself said to use the MySQL bug >> tracker and not RT, so I submitted my bug to the DBD::mysql section there. >> Taking into account the response I got to my patch on the MySQL bug tracker, >> that they removed the DBD::mysql section at the same time, the issues I >> found myself, the age of the last release, and the RT queue, it didn't paint >> a picture of "this is a priority" and I was given the impression that >> Oracle/MySQL had lost interest. >> >> I wouldn't say it's a belief, as that sounds a lot more certain. But it is >> the impression I get. I'm not suggesting that they want to discourage its >> development, just that they don't appear to view it as being as important as >> it once was. That would go some way to explain why it appears to have >> suffered from some neglect and is in need of some tlc. > > It's not clear to me that *Oracle* has ever had any particular view about > DBD::mysql. > > It's not an Oracle product. > It wasn't a Sun product before Oracle bought Sun. > And as far as I am aware, it was not a MySQL AB product before Sun bought > MySQL AB. > > It's true that MySQLers contributed some work to DBD::mysql, but as far as > being any official company product ... I have never had that impression. > >>> Which it is not. It's simply that DBD::mysql is not an Oracle product. >>> Oracle is not responsible to fix DBD::mysql bugs. >> >> I would assume Oracle has a vested interest in it? > > Why? Absent any statement from Oracle, I don't think we can say. > > >>> That said, if your next statement is correct, that'd be great. >>> >>>> However, it does appear that some activity has come back. I'm not sure if >>>> anyone looked at my patch, but I have since realised that there was a lot >>>> more amiss. DBD::mysql really needs to be updated for proper MySQL *5* >>>> support. >>>> >>>> I was talking to Peter about extra hacking sessions at our last Perl meet. >>>> I'll make sure this is on the agenda. >>> Good, thanks.
I had the privilege of attending a meeting with some of the senior Oracle Mysql staff and I personally raised the subject of ongoing Oracle support for DBD::mysql. The response was most definitely not negative, they both knew the subject matter and knew that Patrick Galbraith was the maintainer. I did not get the slightly impression they have any negative approach towards the DBD::mysql. At worst their attitude was "its an open source project we have no control over, but if Patrick asks for help we will do our best", which seems pretty reasonable to me. Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
