"Norvald H. Ryeng" <norvald.ryeng@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 08:07:22 +0100, Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx> >> Well, unless Oracle as upstream wants to get involved as downstream >> maintainers in Fedora as well. They did offer to do that but don't seem >> to have stepped up yet. > Let's do it now, then. :-) > We want to keep the MySQL package in Fedora and are willing to co-maintain > or take over maintainership if nobody else will do it. We haven't really > discussed this with the current maintainers yet, but from the discussions > on this list it seems they're not interested in maintaining the package > after F19. If us stepping up changes that, we are happy to co-maintain. The way this worked in the past (and still does on RHEL and some other distros) is that MySQL AB provided RPMs named "MySQL", "MySQL-server", etc, which simply conflicted with the Red Hat-supplied packages named "mysql", "mysql-server", etc. Perhaps it would be best to continue that naming tradition, ie establish a new Oracle-maintained Fedora package named "MySQL", instead of figuring out how to transition maintainership of the "mysql" packages. This would give us some more wiggle room about managing the transition --- in particular, it's hard to see how we manage Obsoletes/Provides linkages in any sane fashion if the "mysql" package name continues in use. I think we're going to have to end up with a design in which "mysql" becomes essentially a virtual Provides name. regards, tom lane -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
