On 5. 3. 2013 at 19:14:25, Honza Horak wrote: > On 03/05/2013 11:07 AM, Norvald H. Ryeng wrote: > > On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 16:17:00 +0100, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> 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. > > > > We now have a set of working 5.6.10 packages. The packages pass mtr > > tests and we've tested some of the packages that depend on MySQL (php, > > perl-DBD-MySQL, etc.). It all seems to be working well, so I think we're > > ready to get it into rawhide. I believe Bjørn Munch has already > > contacted you about how to upload, etc. > > I'm glad to hear that things get move on with MySQL-5.6 effort. > > > We've kept the existing package names. I don't understand the reasons > > behind the name change you suggest. Honza Horák has added a real-mysql > > virtual provides, and this is provided by the existing mysql and mariadb > > packages, so it seems the infrastructure you suggest is already in > > place. Our 5.6.10 packages are just an upgrade of the existing mysql > > packages, so I see no need for a name change, and a change now would > > break upgrades for users that already have the mysql packages installed. > > We're still going to make mariadb the default in F19 as proposed in the > Feature page. Since depended packages are now built against > libmysqlclient.so from mariadb, we should really ensure mariadb package > will be installed (if not explicitly requested otherwise by users), > because MySQL lacks some client side features that mariadb adds -- so > keeping MySQL installed would introduce potential compatibility problems. > > About the issues with the current way how the things are handling -- we > introduced real-mysql virtual provides to distinguish between mysql > package and mysql virtual name -- that doesn't work well in all aspects, > it is not very clean and it also brings ambiguities. > > We decided to solve that as proposed above -- to introduce a new package > MySQL (dist-git already done) where original MySQL project will be kept > and eventually upgraded to 5.6 by contributors from Oracle. > > Package mysql will be retired as of F19 and the name "mysql" will exist > only as a virtual provide for compatibility reasons. mariadb will > provide "mysql" names, while MySQL won't -- ideally both packages could > provide it but RPM cannot define a priority for preferring one of two > packages that provide the same symbol. Is that right, Jan or Ales? Or > anything changed in that field? Nothing has changed in this area - there are some heuristics used, I think the most used one is to pick the package with the shortest name ;-) I'm now pushing for proper support of versioning in provides, that might help you. But even if we decide to support it, we are still looking on a time frame of at least a month or so. > So, the current plan with a new MySQL package will result in much more > cleaner solution and should avoid ambiguities. > > Regards, > Honza > > Note: In case there are some reactions, I'd like to excuse myself that > I'll be off-line for a few days now and won't be able to respond until > Monday.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
