On 2/9/2013 1:58 AM, Remi Collet wrote:
Le 25/01/2013 19:46, Norvald Ryeng a écrit :
We'll try to do better in the future.
So I will also try to work better,
and so will report the annoying packaging bugs.
MySQL Workbench 5.2.46 is released, so
Connector/C++
http://bugs.mysql.com/
Liang Suilong writes:
> Thanks for all developers' great work. Here I have two questions about
> cluster.
> MariaDB stays in Fedora repository now, however, Galera Cluster does not
> contain in MariaDB. MariaDB with Galera Cluster is marked as stable. Is
> there any plan to enable Galera Cluster
Thanks for all developers' great work. Here I have two questions about
cluster.
MariaDB stays in Fedora repository now, however, Galera Cluster does not
contain in MariaDB. MariaDB with Galera Cluster is marked as stable. Is
there any plan to enable Galera Cluster feature.
NDBCluster Engine was d
Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 09/02/2013 19:08, Alfredo Kojima a écrit :
>> Whenever we need to use a 3rd party lib that no distribution ships,
>> we're stuck thinking whether it's better to ship it ourselves or just
>> leave out everything, forcing users and packagers to fetch them
>> externally. Can y
Le 09/02/2013 19:08, Alfredo Kojima a écrit :
> Hi Remi
>
> About bundled 3rd party libs, what is the general feeling among packagers
> about these?
Per packaging Guidelines, bundled libraries are forbidden
(with very rare exceptions).
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Lib
Le 25/01/2013 19:46, Norvald Ryeng a écrit :
> We'll try to do better in the future.
So I will also try to work better,
and so will report the annoying packaging bugs.
MySQL Workbench 5.2.46 is released, so
Connector/C++
http://bugs.mysql.com/68320
Missing option for library i
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> You are putting the cart before the horse. You have to demonstrate its
> feasible to fix them before excluding future uses. I don't see how it is
> possible to fix the entire distribution to never use conflicts.
Aggressive renaming (see e.g. what I did to kdelibs to allo
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 12:16:36AM -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> But the fact that the packages conflict should stand in the way.
>
>
> We don't have any guidelines that forbids it.
>
>
Just a note for people searching the mailing list later:
We do have Guidelines that prohibi
It looks like openSUSE is providing both, MariaDB and MySQL, with MariaDB
as a default[1].
[1] - http://michal.hrusecky.net/2013/01/mysql-mariadb-and-opensuse-12-3/
2013/2/4 Honza Horak
> On 02/03/2013 06:24 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
>
>> 01.02.2013 00:42, James Hogarth wrote:
>>
>>> I'd still
On 02/03/2013 06:24 PM, Pavel Alexeev wrote:
01.02.2013 00:42, James Hogarth wrote:
I'd still say yes since the context of this discussion is mysql 5.5 to
mariadb 5.5 and nothing to do with mysql 5.6 and the time for mariadb
10/11 to become fully compatible to what's brought to the table in
that
Hi
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> For a starter, I propose excluding all new uses of Conflicts (except with
> < someEVR versioning where an EVR >= someEVR is already available in the
> repository, or if the item being conflicted with is not in Fedora), and
> trying to get
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Do you have a proposal to solve it other than excluding all possible
> alternative implementations? If so, you should post it and let FPC vote on
> it.
For a starter, I propose excluding all new uses of Conflicts (except with
< someEVR versioning where an EVR >= someEVR is
Hi
>
> But the fact that the packages conflict should stand in the way.
>
We don't have any guidelines that forbids it.
> I don't see how having 2 packages which are drop-in replacements of each
> other and ship conflicting files (requiring the packages to Conflict with
> each other at RPM leve
Remi Collet wrote:
> - if you don't like fork of MySQL, why do you fork other projects ?
> MW include a forked version of vsqlite++
> (and AFAIK, upstream is not aware of your changes / need)
Another project Oracle effectively forked in OpenOffice.org, by refusing to
donate the OpenOffice.org tra
Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> If the current maintainers orphan mysql anyone can pick it up including
> Oracle employees and continue it's maintenance within the distribution.
>
> Any beef, competition or what not between Red Hat and Oracle ( or anyone
> else for that matter ) is between Red Hat
01.02.2013 00:42, James Hogarth wrote:
Is it?
http://blog.mariadb.org/explanation-on-mariadb-10-0/ and
http://blog.mariadb.org/mariadb-10-0-and-mysql-5-6/ seem to
suggest that MariaDB will no longer be following Mysql as
religiously as the feature suggests
I'd still say y
> Is it?
>
> http://blog.mariadb.org/explanation-on-mariadb-10-0/ and
> http://blog.mariadb.org/mariadb-10-0-and-mysql-5-6/ seem to suggest that
> MariaDB will no longer be following Mysql as religiously as the feature
> suggests
>
>
>
I'd still say yes since the context of this discussion is mysql
On 30 January 2013 04:24, James Hogarth wrote:
> > Second, if mariadb differs more in the future and stops to be "drop-in"
> replacement, then we'll need an alternative for applications, where mariadb
> won't be suitable enough. Nevertheless, this is not a current issue right
> now.
> >
>
> Indee
> Firstly, some admins may be bound to mysql because of the certification
or similar reason, but it probably won't be a technical reason. It'd be
nice if admins work with providers in such cases and push them to add
mariadb into set of "supported" options. I believe there won't be technical
barrier
On 01/26/2013 10:33 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 01/26/2013 08:42 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 21:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.01.2013 21:24, schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon:
but keep in mind that Fedora is the base for RHEL
applications may be certified for
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:43:02PM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> We would like to replace MySQL with MariaDB in early development cycle for
> Fedora 19. MySQL will continue to be available for at least one release, but
> MariaDB will become the default. Also, we do not intend to support concurre
> On 01/28/2013 01:22 PM, Norvald Ryeng wrote:
>> We include the docs because they are useful to users downloading the
>> software directly from dev.mysql.com, even if Fedora and other distros
>> can't redistribute them.
>>
>> In Debian, recreating the tarball is done by the get-orig-source target
On 01/28/2013 01:22 PM, Norvald Ryeng wrote:
We include the docs because they are useful to users downloading the
software directly from dev.mysql.com, even if Fedora and other distros
can't redistribute them.
In Debian, recreating the tarball is done by the get-orig-source target
in debian/rule
On Fri, 2013-01-25 at 20:29 +0100, Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 25/01/2013 19:46, Norvald Ryeng a écrit :
> > Here's the bug: http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=68182
This bug has now been fixed and will be included in release 1.2.0.
> So, a few questions ?
>
> - why do you publish "community" source t
OpenSUSE is dumping MySQL in the next release 12.3[1] and, also is
Wikipedia[2]
[1] -
http://www.muktware.com/5148/opensuse-dumps-mysql-makes-mariadb-default-database
[2] -
http://www.zdnet.com/wikipedia-moving-from-mysql-to-mariadb-708912/
2013/1/26 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> On 01/26/201
On 01/26/2013 08:42 PM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 21:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 26.01.2013 21:24, schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon:
but keep in mind that Fedora is the base for RHEL
applications may be certified for mysql
And that is Fedora's problem how?
and THAT is th
Am 26.01.2013 21:24, schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>> but keep in mind that Fedora is the base for RHEL
>> applications may be certified for mysql
>
> And that is Fedora's problem how?
and THAT is the problem with many pieces of fedora-development
the last few years - what do we care for the rea
Am 26.01.2013 21:14, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> a operating systemd / distribution should not built for it's
> own with the attitude "what does us bother software outside our
> repos"?
>
> this NIH syndrome is very very bad
> Both MySQL and MariaDB is available and neither was inv
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 21:34 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 26.01.2013 21:24, schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon:
> >> but keep in mind that Fedora is the base for RHEL
> >> applications may be certified for mysql
> >
> > And that is Fedora's problem how?
>
> and THAT is the problem with many pieces
On Fri, 2013-01-25 at 19:05 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
> Am 25.01.2013 18:57, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> > Just to be clear, RHEL != Fedora. Red Hat policy for RHEL kernel
> is not acceptable to Fedora and Fedora kernel
> > continues to have the patches split out. You cannot use that to
> def
Le vendredi 25 janvier 2013 à 19:05 +0100, Reindl Harald a écrit :
>
> Am 25.01.2013 18:57, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> > Just to be clear, RHEL != Fedora. Red Hat policy for RHEL kernel is not
> > acceptable to Fedora and Fedora kernel
> > continues to have the patches split out. You cannot use
Hi
> a operating systemd / distribution should not built for it's
> own with the attitude "what does us bother software outside our
> repos"?
>
> this NIH syndrome is very very bad
>
Both MySQL and MariaDB is available and neither was invented here and
either can be used as per your preference.
Am 26.01.2013 19:59, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Reindl Harald
> if there is no way to have both, mysqld AND mariadb Fedora
> should do itself a favour and keep mysqld, not for now -
> forever or as long not most other software supports mariadb
> exp
Hi
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Reindl Harald
>
> if there is no way to have both, mysqld AND mariadb Fedora
> should do itself a favour and keep mysqld, not for now -
> forever or as long not most other software supports mariadb
> explicitly which is not the case now
>
It is very much poss
Am 25.01.2013 18:57, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> Just to be clear, RHEL != Fedora. Red Hat policy for RHEL kernel is not
> acceptable to Fedora and Fedora kernel
> continues to have the patches split out. You cannot use that to defend MySQL
> policies here. You can do whatever
> you want to d
Le 25/01/2013 19:46, Norvald Ryeng a écrit :
> Here's the bug: http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=68182
So, a few questions ?
- why do you publish "community" source tarball with non GPL
documentation inside ?
We need to recreate a "nodocs" tarball for each version, nightmare
Ex : mysql, mysql-wo
- m...@zarb.org wrote:
> So let's take a very narrow and specific example, and see what could you
> do after the fact to make packagers life easier.
>
> While working with Remi on a package review[1], I was quite surprised to
> see that one Oracle engineer created a internal bug for the inclu
On 25.01.2013 18:49, Andrew Rist wrote:
On 1/23/2013 6:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 17:49 -0800, Andrew Rist wrote:
but the database choice for Fedora should only focus on the merits and
the quality of the MySQL code
You may have read the mission statement, but you appe
Hi
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
>
> When it comes to "Freedom"many companies working, contributing, and
> supporting open source codebases have information disclosure policies very
> similar to MySQL [1]. The code is still GPL and out there for everyone to
> check ou
On 1/23/2013 6:05 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 17:49 -0800, Andrew Rist wrote:
but the database choice for Fedora should only focus on the merits and
the quality of the MySQL code
You may have read the mission statement, but you appear to have entirely
missed the four found
On Fri, 25 Jan 2013, Honza Horak wrote:
On 01/23/2013 01:04 PM, Ales Kozumplik wrote:
On 01/22/2013 10:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yes, that's the general idea --- any dependencies on mysql should result
in installing mariadb, unless the user takes specific action to get
mysql instead. Ideally
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Honza Horak wrote:
> Is there really no way to do removal/install like above in one yum
> transaction?
I've been watching this thread but otherwise staying out of it :)
But to answer your question I believe that if you use yum shell and
tell it to erase mysql and
Once upon a time, Honza Horak said:
> Is there really no way to do removal/install like above in one yum
> transaction?
Use yum shell. You can set up multiple things to do and then "run" it
all as one transaction.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I
On 01/23/2013 01:04 PM, Ales Kozumplik wrote:
On 01/22/2013 10:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yes, that's the general idea --- any dependencies on mysql should result
in installing mariadb, unless the user takes specific action to get
mysql instead. Ideally we'd just do the standard Provides/Obsoletes
On 01/25/2013 02:46 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
It strikes me that we missed a bet in setting up the mariadb package
for only F19-and-up in git.
You can request a branch (for a release which accepts branch requests, i.e.
currently F17 and F18) after the fact, at any time. So you di
Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Honestly, I'd be curious as to whether we could get all the compatibility
> testing done early enough, and packages changed, such that we could
> consider dropping MySQL. It's just... cleaner.
+1
Shipping both is a mess we really want to avoid.
Kevin Kofler
--
Tom Lane wrote:
> It strikes me that we missed a bet in setting up the mariadb package
> for only F19-and-up in git.
You can request a branch (for a release which accepts branch requests, i.e.
currently F17 and F18) after the fact, at any time. So you didn't really
miss anything. :-) See:
https:
Le jeudi 24 janvier 2013 à 12:11 -0800, Norvald Ryeng a écrit :
> I'm sorry to hear about the lack of communication. I'm a MySQL
> developer, and for the last year I've been working with different
> packagers. Linux distributions are an important part of our community,
> and we'd like very much
- fed...@famillecollet.com wrote:
> Le 24/01/2013 02:49, Andrew Rist a écrit :
> > We've been following the discussions to replace MySQL with MariaDB
> ...
>
> /me speaking from my experience.
>
> I don't maintain MySQL, but various other mysql packages
> (mysql-utilities, mysql-connector-py
On 01/24/2013 03:19 PM, Remi Collet wrote:
Le 24/01/2013 02:49, Andrew Rist a écrit :
We've been following the discussions to replace MySQL with MariaDB
...
/me speaking from my experience.
I don't maintain MySQL, but various other mysql packages
(mysql-utilities, mysql-connector-python, mysq
On 01/24/2013 01:49 AM, Andrew Rist wrote:
We've been following the discussions to replace MySQL with MariaDB in
Fedora, and would like to provide additional data to help the
community make the most informed decision. Instead of switching**the
default to MariaDB 5.5 we would like to propose th
Le 24/01/2013 02:49, Andrew Rist a écrit :
> We've been following the discussions to replace MySQL with MariaDB
...
/me speaking from my experience.
I don't maintain MySQL, but various other mysql packages
(mysql-utilities, mysql-connector-python, mysql-workbench, ...).
Maintaining Oracle stuff
On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 16:24 +1100, Arthur G wrote:
> It would nice for MariaDB to obsolete MySQL and have an emulation
> switch that allows it to masquerade as a MySQL installation as well as
> operate in native mode. This will provide backwards compatability for
> systems that use products that wa
It would nice for MariaDB to obsolete MySQL and have an emulation
switch that allows it to masquerade as a MySQL installation as well as
operate in native mode. This will provide backwards compatability for
systems that use products that want to see a MySQL installation. This
will also provide a fr
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 17:49 -0800, Andrew Rist wrote:
> but the database choice for Fedora should only focus on the merits and
> the quality of the MySQL code
You may have read the mission statement, but you appear to have entirely
missed the four foundations:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Found
We've been following the discussions to replace MySQL with MariaDB in
Fedora, and would like to provide additional data to help the community
make the most informed decision. Instead of switching**the default to
MariaDB 5.5 we would like to propose that Fedora instead integrate MySQL
5.6. Swi
Peter Robinson writes:
> Will it be designed to work with the alternatives infrastructure so
> that those that actually want mysql can swap it in/out?
No; we're specifically *not* interested in building alternatives
infrastructure. It would be a waste of effort if we're going to stop
shipping my
Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) said:
> > "Default" might not be the exactly correct word here. The main thing
> > I'm expecting would be that the "mysql database" package group would
> > actually give you mariadb, as would the anaconda checkbox.
>
> Will it be designed to work with the al
- Original Message -
> Tom Lane (t...@redhat.com) said:
> > Yes, that's the general idea --- any dependencies on mysql should
> > result
> > in installing mariadb, unless the user takes specific action to get
> > mysql instead. Ideally we'd just do the standard
> > Provides/Obsoletes
> > d
On 01/22/2013 10:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yes, that's the general idea --- any dependencies on mysql should result
in installing mariadb, unless the user takes specific action to get
mysql instead. Ideally we'd just do the standard Provides/Obsoletes
dance for replacing one package with another, b
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Nottingham writes:
>> Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
>>> We would like to replace MySQL with MariaDB in early development cycle for
>>> Fedora 19. MySQL will continue to be available for at least one release, but
>>> MariaDB will
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 02:12:27AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> It strikes me that we missed a bet in setting up the mariadb package
> for only F19-and-up in git. If we made a version available for F18,
> that would allow people to test compatibility without having to run
> rawhide, which is somethin
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 02:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Nottingham writes:
> > Tom Lane (t...@redhat.com) said:
> >> (If the compatibility testing goes *really* smoothly, maybe we could
> >> just drop the requirement for original mysql to still be available,
> >> in which case it reduces to the
Bill Nottingham writes:
> Tom Lane (t...@redhat.com) said:
>> (If the compatibility testing goes *really* smoothly, maybe we could
>> just drop the requirement for original mysql to still be available,
>> in which case it reduces to the standard package-replacement problem.
>> But I'm not prepare
Tom Lane (t...@redhat.com) said:
> Yes, that's the general idea --- any dependencies on mysql should result
> in installing mariadb, unless the user takes specific action to get
> mysql instead. Ideally we'd just do the standard Provides/Obsoletes
> dance for replacing one package with another, b
Kevin Fenzi writes:
> Would this involve moving around any of the provides for mysql over to
> MariaDB?
Yes, that's the general idea --- any dependencies on mysql should result
in installing mariadb, unless the user takes specific action to get
mysql instead. Ideally we'd just do the standard Pr
On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:25:46 -0500
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bill Nottingham writes:
> > Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
> >> We would like to replace MySQL with MariaDB in early development
> >> cycle for Fedora 19. MySQL will continue to be available for at
> >> least one release, but Mari
Bill Nottingham writes:
> Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
>> We would like to replace MySQL with MariaDB in early development cycle for
>> Fedora 19. MySQL will continue to be available for at least one release, but
>> MariaDB will become the default. Also, we do not intend to support
Jaroslav Reznik (jrez...@redhat.com) said:
> As decided by FESCo on 2012-12-05 meeting, all proposed Features are required
> to pass through the community review by announcing them on devel-announce
> list.
> FESCo votes on new features no sooner than a week from the announcement.
>
> = Features
69 matches
Mail list logo
