Sriram Natarajan wrote: > > > Seema Alevoor wrote: >> Lars Heill wrote: >> >>> Sriram Natarajan wrote: >>> >>>> Lars Heill wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Most upstack components like Drupal , Joomla! expects a working >>>> combination of apache, php and mysql. So, it is upto PHP and MySQL >>>> to decide on the working glue versions and provide the glue so that >>>> each can work well with each other. >>>> >>>> Currently, PHP builds with MySQL 5.0 and ships PHP-MySQL library >>>> capturing MySQL 5.0 (SUNWmysql5u) as its dependency. Would you like >>>> us to continue with the same behavior ? If we do this, then within >>>> OpenSolaris 2008.11, 'amp-dev' or ?mp' meta cluster within IPS will >>>> only bring/install MySQL 5.0 component as the default database. Is >>>> your team okay with this ? >>>> >>>> Now, if you split existing MySQL 5.0 to also include client runtime >>>> libraries, then we can modify 'amp' or 'amp-dev' meta cluster within >>>> OpenSolaris 2008.11 to include Apache 2.2.9, PHP 5.2.6. MySQL 5.0 >>>> client libraries and MySQL 5.1 server. This is just my 2c worth >>>> thought. >>>> >>> My default recommendation would of course be to go with the latest >>> version, soon to be 5.1, at any given time wherever possible. >>> Since 5.1 is known to come, I would expect upstack components to >>> adapt as needed? - or yell if there is a severe problem ;) >>> >>> >> >> APR-util 1.3, too, provides a DB driver for MySQL and currently, >> it is using 5.0 client library. I guess even this should be changed to >> use MySQL 5.1 . >> >> I was wondering if the package names of the components like APR-util, >> PHP, which provide drivers/extensions to the databases, >> should include the database version info ? >> e.g, SUNWapu13dbd-mysql51 , SUNWapu13dbd-pgsql83 >> SUNWphp52u-mysql51, SUNWphp52u-pgsql83 >> >> Or is it enough if the version information is provided in the package >> description ? >> >> > At least with respect to PHP, the MySQL version that it compiles with is > need to be provided at compile time and there is no easy way to support > more than 1 version of MySQL within PHP extension. Hence, it doesn't
That is true for APR-util, too. > provide any additional benefit by adding version information within php > mysql glue package names. Besides, when you add the package version Except that, for the user, it is evident from the name that the glue is for such and such version of the db (especially when the system has multiple db versions installed). > number to the already cryptic package name, it is already readable any > more .. > I agree :) -- Seema.
