ARC draft has been out for review since July 24: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/webstack-discuss/2008-July/002209.html It addresses coexistence between 5.0 and 5.1: Simply put: you should be able to add/run 5.1 while existing 5.0 server instances are not affected. See also my comment on pkg-discuss, referenced by Seema above: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/pkg-discuss/2008-July/005061.html
6728729 arrived July 23. It focuses on IPS and splitting products into logical sub packages, which is A Good Thing (TM) (and also a requirement in the Java ES consolidation[s]): http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/webstack-discuss/2008-July/002205.html. Such interface modification issues should be brought up in the ARC draft/ case review, though, not in a code review when ARC material and RTIs are already out and any rework and resulting time loss is more expensive. At that time we did not believe we would have the time/resources to make the changes, but we will scope the effort and have a go now since the ARC is not in an approved state yet and, as Jyri noted, it will be less expensive now than later. We will not plan modifications to the existing 5.0 layout. --- What is considered the proper or most efficient way to let upstack users know about a new version (or other changes) coming out, apart from announcing it on the lists in a new thread, in an ARC draft review request etc? -- Lars Sriram Natarajan wrote, On 08/ 7/08 07:45 AM: > Do you have ARC approval in the current state ? If not, then you could > include this issue in the current ARC case . Also, please note that > upstack components like PHP need to be updated to include the the proper > dependency. Not sure, which other components depend on mysql . So, > discussing this within the ARC case would be a good first step. > > Also, why do you want to integrate both mysql 5.0 as well as 5.1 ? is > it because of backward compatibility concerns ? > > - Sriram > > Sunanda Menon wrote: >> The RFE is 6728729:MySQL should have libraries in separate >> >> I would like to take that up separately after this Integration is done >> as we have already filed the PKG RTI and ARC case etc ,so to go and >> do the rework at this stage won't be possible . >> >> We shall take it up separately . >> >> Thanks Sunanda >> >> Jyri Virkki wrote: >>> On Aug 6, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Sriram Natarajan wrote: >>> >>> >>>> IMO, your team might want to consider splitting MySQL 5.0 base package >>>> into core database server and client runtime libraries at the earliest >>>> possible. The same should also happen for MySQL 5.1 as well. >>>> >>> +1 >>> I filed this RFE some time ago (can't look up the CR# right now). >>> Such a packaging split is easiest to introduce at the same time as the >>> new version packages, so the best time to do it is alongside >>> 5.1 integration.
