On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Axel Schwenke wrote:
>> But to put things in context, in MySQL 5.0 series the situation was
>> the opposite: The bugs were public but the publicly released and GPL
>> licensed bug fixes would be up to 6 months delayd in favor of paying
>> customers getting them in
Hi Clint,
First of all let me say that I wholeheartedly appreciate the decision
you announced earlier, I think it is well balanced and thought through.
So what follows is just for the sake of discussion.
How do 99.99% of software vendors support their general public? By
publishing software u
Excerpts from Alex Yurchenko's message of Fri Feb 17 05:57:03 -0800 2012:
> Finally! A post that makes all wrong points!
>
> On 2012-02-17 11:53, Björn Boschman wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > Am 16.02.2012 19:33, schrieb Alex Esterkin:
> >> As an end user, I would most strongly dislike this. You cle
Finally! A post that makes all wrong points!
On 2012-02-17 11:53, Björn Boschman wrote:
Hi Alex,
Am 16.02.2012 19:33, schrieb Alex Esterkin:
As an end user, I would most strongly dislike this. You clearly
don't
understand how corporate users think and operate, how they work with
open source
Henrik Ingo wrote:
>
> For completeness, let me also defend Oracle for a change :-) There's
> also the 3rd option:
>
> * Stay with MySQL and blindly apply the updates that Oracle continues
> to release as GPL.
> But to put things in context, in MySQL 5.0 series the situation was
> the opposit
Hi!
> "Henrik" == Henrik Ingo writes:
Henrik> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Walter Heck
wrote:
>> As for MariaDB, I like their much more community driven development
>> that seems less commercially driven,
Henrik> ...
>> At this point I think MariaDB would probably be a better match f
2012/2/17 Björn Boschman :
> This leads us to the following options:
> * Stay with MySQL but no security nor bugfixes
> * Search for an alternative which is even 100% compatible with MySQL +
> having full community support
For completeness, let me also defend Oracle for a change :-) There's
also
Hi Alex,
Am 16.02.2012 19:33, schrieb Alex Esterkin:
As an end user, I would most strongly dislike this. You clearly don't
understand how corporate users think and operate, how they work with
open source technologies, and how they plan and evolve their technical
roadmaps.
I think I understand
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:55:58 +0200, Walter Heck wrote:
> I think it would be fair to take into account both the things Colin
> and Stewart have said as many of them are correct, but their words
> should also be taken with a grain of salt as they work for the
> companies that would benefit heavily
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 08:33:50 +0100, Bjoern Boschman wrote:
> On 16.02.2012 00:57, Henrik Ingo wrote:
> > Percona Server is like MariaDB in that both of them are compatible
> > with MySQL and you could do a plug-and-play replacement. Percona
> > Server is much closer to MySQL (which many think is
I agree 100%.
Even though I'm a huge fan of PostgreSQL*,* if the standard database has
been MySQL, then the next release must stay MySQL or something that's a
drop-in replacement of (e.g. MariaDB).
After all, those using PostgreSQL are skillful enough to know how to
install PostgreSQL when they n
Great stuff,
What ever the choice, even if it is to keep MySQL alone, lets remember
MySQL will not be dropped ! Any one would still be able to install the
Oracle GA if they wanted to (from some repository, probably partner, or
even main)
If indeed there is a replacement, I can only talk about wha
Hi!
On 16 Feb 2012, at 17:24, Henrik Ingo wrote:
> Clearly I was unclear in my previous email. The 2 year support is not
> true for any of the alternatives. MySQL gives 5 years (and more for
> customers that pay), Percona trails MySQL so they also end up doing 5
> years (and more for paying custo
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Walter Heck wrote:
> As for MariaDB, I like their much more community driven development
> that seems less commercially driven,
...
> At this point I think MariaDB would probably be a better match for
> being in the main ubuntu/debian distro's as their whole ecosy
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Bjoern Boschman wrote:
> More features even though they only apply to niche user are in general
> nothing bad.
Many DBAs tend to be very conservative and like a less is more
approach, but personally I agree with you. I wish there was fork with
everything: all the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 16.02.2012 09:55, Walter Heck wrote:
> I think it would be fair to take into account both the things
> Colin and Stewart have said as many of them are correct, but their
> words should also be taken with a grain of salt as they work for
> the compan
I think it would be fair to take into account both the things Colin
and Stewart have said as many of them are correct, but their words
should also be taken with a grain of salt as they work for the
companies that would benefit heavily from having 'their' fork be the
replacement of mysql. That's not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 16.02.2012 08:40, Henrik Ingo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Bjoern Boschman
> wrote:
>> On 16.02.2012 00:57, Henrik Ingo wrote:
>>> Percona Server is like MariaDB in that both of them are
>>> compatible with MySQL and you could do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On 16.02.2012 00:57, Henrik Ingo wrote:
> Percona Server is like MariaDB in that both of them are compatible
> with MySQL and you could do a plug-and-play replacement. Percona
> Server is much closer to MySQL (which many think is great), shall
>
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Bjoern Boschman wrote:
> On 16.02.2012 00:57, Henrik Ingo wrote:
>> Percona Server is like MariaDB in that both of them are compatible
>> with MySQL and you could do a plug-and-play replacement. Percona
>> Server is much closer to MySQL (which many think is great),
Hi!
On 13 Feb 2012, at 15:20, Eddie Bachle wrote:
> As Linux gains more public recognition, more and more Windows-only
> organizations will consider using it as an alternative, especially for their
> web servers. This is especially true because of the fact that each of the
> necessarily main
21 matches
Mail list logo
