Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I really don't see what we have to gain from having 2 conflicting versions
> of MySQL in Fedora.
We never had the culture of questioning why anyone should include
package as long as it meets the current guidelines. As long as there are
maintainers who are willing to deal with it, I don't see why you feel the
need to protest.
The real bottom line here is that the current mysql maintainers *aren't*
willing to deal with it anymore, and wish to shift our efforts to MariaDB.
Barring someone taking up maintainership of Oracle's version, it's going
to be an orphan.
The current F19 feature for this was written on the assumption that
nobody was going to step forward to do that, and thus that we needed to
transition existing mysql users to mariadb, and that there wasn't much
value in worrying about how to make multiple mysql forks coexist.
Now some folk from Oracle have stated that they'd be willing to take up
the packaging work to keep their version alive in Fedora. I don't wish
to stand in their way, but I think it's fair to wonder how long it'll
take them to get up to speed, since they evidently have zero Fedora
packaging expertise today.
In any case we need to think a bit harder about coexistence issues.
I still think there is no need to support concurrent installation of
both forks of mysql; that would accomplish little except to complicate
the lives of both users and packagers. But we may need to revisit the
idea that we can just have mariadb obsolete mysql and be done.
regards, tom lane