[Maria-developers] MariaDB plugin package names (in Debian) scheme: mariadb-plugin-<name>
Hello! Currenlty we have storage engine packages named mariadb-oqgraph-engine-10.0 mariadb-connect-engine-10.0 Serg suggested in the summer that the version number should be dropped from the engine/plugin package names (it is enough to have it in the package metadata). I was now also thinking that the naming scheme of the base name should change to mariadb-plugin-oqgraph mariadb-plugin-connect The motivation is that plugin is more universal than 'engine' as some plugins are not engines, and by having all plugins prepended with mariadb-plugin-* they list nicer in alphabetical listings. What do you think? I already experimented in the lines of this with http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-mysql/mariadb-10.0.git/commit/?id=97b3c44...
Hi, Otto! On Jan 02, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
Hello!
Currenlty we have storage engine packages named mariadb-oqgraph-engine-10.0 mariadb-connect-engine-10.0
Serg suggested in the summer that the version number should be dropped from the engine/plugin package names (it is enough to have it in the package metadata).
To explain... As far as I was told the original motivation for having mysql-server-5.1, mysql-server-5.5, and mysql-server (with no version) was: * the user can install "mysql-server" and let it be upgraded automatically later on from mysql-server-5.1 to mysql-server-5.5, and further. * alternatively, one can install "mysql-server-5.1" directly, and it'll be automatically upgraded from 5.1.20, to 5.1.21..., 5.1.40, and so on, but will never go to 5.5.x series. That is, this package naming scheme allows one to "pin" a particular major release, if needed. Or so I was told. This logic does not apply to plugins, a plugin must *always* be for the matching server version (if possible), one should not be able to pin a plugin to 10.1 and pin the server to 10.0, for example. This is true for mariadb-test package too. Which means that plugin and test packages should not have the major version in the package name. Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org -- Vote for my Percona Live 2016 talks: https://www.percona.com/live/data-performance-conference-2016/sessions/maria... https://www.percona.com/live/data-performance-conference-2016/sessions/maria...
2016-01-02 12:43 GMT+02:00 Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org>:
Serg suggested in the summer that the version number should be dropped from the engine/plugin package names (it is enough to have it in the package metadata).
To explain...
Yes I know this, but the actual question was, is mariadb-plugin-<name> a good scheme or should we stickt o mariadb-<name>-engine or something else?
Hi, Otto! On Jan 04, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
2016-01-02 12:43 GMT+02:00 Sergei Golubchik <serg@mariadb.org>:
Serg suggested in the summer that the version number should be dropped from the engine/plugin package names (it is enough to have it in the package metadata).
To explain...
Yes I know this, but the actual question was, is mariadb-plugin-<name> a good scheme or should we stick to mariadb-<name>-engine or something else?
mariadb-plugin-<name> is fine. Just don't forget to rename mariadb-cracklib-password-check-10.2 -> mariadb-plugin-cracklib-password-check It's our only (at the moment) non-storage-engine plugin. Regards, Sergei Chief Architect MariaDB and security@mariadb.org -- Vote for my Percona Live 2016 talks: https://www.percona.com/live/data-performance-conference-2016/sessions/maria... https://www.percona.com/live/data-performance-conference-2016/sessions/maria...
participants (2)
-
Otto Kekäläinen -
Sergei Golubchik