On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 03:28:50PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > In <20090524145214.ga16...@cat.rubenette.is-a-geek.com>, lee wrote: > >On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 10:15:36PM -0500, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > >> It's really a KDE problem, although the solution will probably cause > >> some trouble for the Debian packaging team as well. Especially > >> minimizing the amount of configuration required while still allowing > >> multiple possible backends. > > > >That isn't really the problem. > >I > >don't want to run an akonadi server either, whatever that is. > > Oh, then you don't want to run those parts of KDE; They require a connection > to an Akonadi server. They've been scheduled to since before KDE 4.0 was > available.
Maybe not. I'd be fine without them, if it would work without --- but it doesn't. > If you don't want to run any "servers" then you don't want to run Gnome > (ORBit = CORBA server), KDE 3 (dcopserver), Xfce (notifications go via the > DBus server) or X11 (xorg is an X11 server). Who says that I don't want to run any servers? > >Why don't they save the data in human readable text files in users' > >home directories without needing all kinds of external server > >software? > > Performance, cross-referencing, and indexing. If they have problems with that for the maybe 5 to 10 entries I might make in a calendar within a year, then there must be something basically wrong with that calendar. Utilizing a RDBMS like mysql for that isn't a good solution for that problem. Do you have and use an 18wheeler to go to the store to buy your groceries for a week? > >It's not like I had 500000 appointments or a company with > >thousands of users for which a central database server to store > >appointments might make sense. > > The applications and frameworks are designed to work for individuals with > few appointments and also scale to the largest groupware installations. That's nice, but it obviously doesn't scale for those individuals with few appointments. It might work for them as well as an 18wheeler works for buying groceries, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable or that anyone who doesn't need it would want to use it. Do you have all available software installed and all available servers running, even though you don't need or want them? Probably not ... > >Even if I had that, the installation > >doesn't ask if I want to use a mysql server on another host. > > But, it will be possible to set that up in the future. They should have something that scales well for few appointments as well. Or it should work without these applications. > >Besides, entrusting important information to a particular application > >is not an option. If I had done that over the last 15 years, I'd > >probably have lost that information several times or it would have at > >least become inaccessable. > > Not if the file format was public. I can understanding not using a format > that can't be processed without a particular piece of software, but the on- > disk format used by MySQL is public information. You don't have to use > MySQL to access. You can write your own software or pay someone to write > the software for you without the blessing or control of MySQL. Where do you find the needed information in 20 years? And what if you want to access the stored information but you don't want to wait a year or two before you were eventually able to figure out what format was used to store it and to create software allowing you to retrieve the information? It doesn't make sense to create such an inconvenience in the first place. Sometimes it cannot be avoided or is at least hard to avoid, but that is unfortunate and it would be better to come up with ways that don't create the problem instead of coming up with more and more "solutions" that do create this problem. And BTW, it's not only wasting resources to have a mysql server installed that you don't need and don't use, it's also about making things more complicated and time consuming when you have a mysql server that eventually needs to be adminstered and that you eventually have to figure out a way to make backups for? I don't know in particular what would use mysql, so I might suddenly find that I lost data after reinstalling because I didn't know that I had to backup a mysql database somewhere (and reinstall that, too). What if you use stable and from one distribution to another, or the one after the next, they change something about mysql and you suddenly find yourself with the problem of having to somehow convert your data to be able to use it with the new mysql version? Obviously, they don't have things thought out well enough. If they had, they wouldn't just throw in a mysql server (without notice even!), but they would offer that as an option you could upgrade to if you needed that, and you'd have to do that deliberately. There seems to be too much windoze thinking entering Debian: Hide everything from the users, take control of their computers away from them, make things unfixable --- and the next step is to provide them with only crappy software. I'm beginning to become more and more unhappy with Debian. The quality has gone down quite a bit already. If they keep going this way, we'll all be using windoze in about 10 years. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
