Hi Henrik, all On 11/05/2010, at 10:52 PM, Henrik Ingo wrote:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:39 AM, Peter Zaitsev <pz@percona.com> wrote:
Inventing your own MariaDB 5.2 is very confusing, seriously
Are fixes in MySQL 5.1.47 in MariaDB 5.2.0 ? Requirement to go and check the docs all the time is inconvenient.
What you say here is a very good use case to check proposals against. Your point apparently is, some of your customers may suffer from a bug and you know this was fixed in MySQL 5.1.47. Now it is helpful for you if you can automatically know which MariaDB, Percona Server versions the same fix will be found in.
If it was called MariaDB 5.2.47, would this be any more helpful?
I think *that* could actually work very well.
Or are you insisting it must be MariaDB 5.1.47 (with possible 5.1, 5.2 or 5.3 type of differentiation appended to that with some tag, like mariadb-5.1.47_2nd_edition-...)
If you keep the versioning exactly the same, upgrades can get into trouble and things can get very confusing for users on their systems. Full naming is not always visible from the command line. So having 5.2 vs 5.1 works optically as well as well it look like an upgrade from system tools perspective.
May be some time in the future amount of changes becomes so large the base MySQL version will not be relevant any more but it will take time.
Regarding bug fixes, we hope to stay in sync for some time to come, yes. We don't want to work on our own bugs, this is something we are happy to share :-)
Monty mentioned a monthly release cycle, and I think that might be key. Once people see that consistently happening, with useful fixes, chances are they don't worry about a few weeks delay on an SunOracle bugfix upstream getting into there. The consistency and reliability will be regarded as more important. Regards, Arjen. -- Arjen Lentz, Exec.Director @ Open Query (http://openquery.com) Exceptional Services for MySQL at a fixed budget. Follow our blog at http://openquery.com/blog/ OurDelta: packages for MySQL and MariaDB @ http://ourdelta.org