"Norvald H. Ryeng" <norvald.ry...@oracle.com> writes:
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 08:07:22 +0100, Rahul Sundaram <methe...@gmail.com>
>> 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
