Why support MySQL over postgresql when MySQL is tied to Oracle and its
potential licensing issues? Already Oracle is adding features that were
originally going to be in the release as for pay only. It would be much
better to go with a community owned dbms imho.
--
Jon
On 1/11/12 12:10 PM, Christopher Brooks wrote:
Hi,
Discussion on http://opencast.jira.com/browse/MH-8335 about dropping
database support to one system out of the box cropped up again. Here
are a couple of emails from the past on the issue:
http://opencast.3480289.n2.nabble.com/DB-Nighmares-proposal-tp6934468p6934500.html
http://opencast.3480289.n2.nabble.com/DB-Nighmares-proposal-tp6934468p6941705.html
In short, I don't think it is sustainable to maintain separate DDL's in
our repo for different db's. It's been a problem both with 1.3, and
with 1.2. Instead, we should use autogen wherever we can (thanks Greg
for all the awesome work on making this a reality), and we should ship
a single DDL for a DB, then let the community add new DDL's in our docs
as appropriate. This would minimize our DB issues which continue to
plague us.
I don't see a benefit to maintaining DDLs for more DBs than we have to
as part of our release. Let those who are interested in doing that do
it, and let them optimize/maintain those schemas.
So I'm #proposing we drop postgresql and only ship with schema for
mysql. (the choice being more or less arbitrarily chosen)
Chris
_______________________________________________
Matterhorn mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
To unsubscribe please email
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
