Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-04-07 Thread gregor herrmann
On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 13:52:19 +1000, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: I've uploaded it now with the script renamed to mysql-schema-diff. Wonderful. :) :) Thanks, I've cloned the bug for your convenience, and closed the original one in the upload. Many thanks for your work and once again sorry for

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-04-06 Thread gregor herrmann
On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 14:22:11 +1000, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: Anyway, I'm fine with renaming our mysqldiff to something else, my current favourite being mysqlschemadiff. Comments? ...that would be perfect for me. Dmitry? I'm very happy with this - thank you Gregor and David. I've uploaded

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-04-06 Thread Dmitry Smirnov
On 07/04/12 01:16, gregor herrmann wrote: I've uploaded it now with the script renamed to mysql-schema-diff. Wonderful. :) I'm adding Replaces: libmysql-diff-perl (= 0.43-1) Breaks: libmysql-diff-perl (= 0.43-1) Or maybe better 0.43-2 OK. to mysql-utilities and including list

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-04-02 Thread Dominique Dumont
Le Thursday 29 March 2012 18:22:20, gregor herrmann a écrit : Anyway, I'm fine with renaming our mysqldiff to something else, my current favourite being mysqlschemadiff. Comments? I hope I'm not too late (been busy at the perl-qa hackathon) Could we throw some dashes in this longish name ? To

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-04-02 Thread gregor herrmann
On Mon, 02 Apr 2012 20:55:56 +0200, Dominique Dumont wrote: Anyway, I'm fine with renaming our mysqldiff to something else, my current favourite being mysqlschemadiff. Comments? I hope I'm not too late (been busy at the perl-qa hackathon) Don't worry, I've been waiting fir more comments

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-31 Thread Dmitry Smirnov
Anyway, I'm fine with renaming our mysqldiff to something else, my current favourite being mysqlschemadiff. Comments? ...that would be perfect for me. Dmitry? I'm very happy with this - thank you Gregor and David. I'm adding Replaces: libmysql-diff-perl (= 0.43-1) Breaks:

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-29 Thread gregor herrmann
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:13:30 +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: I'd like to bring few more arguments to consideration. And we should finally resolve this question :) I forgot to CC to David Paleino when I posted my idea of wrapper script so I wrote to him and he replied with another good

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-29 Thread David Paleino
On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 18:22:20 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote: On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:13:30 +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: I'd like to bring few more arguments to consideration. And we should finally resolve this question :) I forgot to CC to David Paleino when I posted my idea of wrapper

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-11 Thread Dmitry Smirnov
I'd like to bring few more arguments to consideration. I forgot to CC to David Paleino when I posted my idea of wrapper script so I wrote to him and he replied with another good argument: I think that, while the wrapper script is a good technical solution, it'll vastly reduce the

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-10 Thread Nicholas Bamber
That sounds good to me. Both packages will require Breaks/Replaces clauses against the old version of the other so the bugs are still needed. On 10/03/12 07:30, Dmitry Smirnov wrote: I would like mysql-utilities not to be intrusive, for that reason I think it make sense to keep its executables

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread David Paleino
Hello, if I might say my own opinion, given that I sponsored mysql-utilities, here is a proposed solution. - libmysql-diff-perl should build a new binary package (let's call it libmysql-diff-perl-bin, for the sake of example). This will only contain the script in /usr/bin/, and will depend

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread Nicholas Bamber
Another option might be to put Conflicts clauses in both packages. That of course assumes that noone would ever want both. Renaming the one in the Perl module seems okay to me but I have not looked at the packages. I am just giving my gut feelings. On 09/03/12 22:34, David Paleino wrote:

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread David Paleino
On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 22:44:03 +, Nicholas Bamber wrote: Another option might be to put Conflicts clauses in both packages. That of course assumes that noone would ever want both. I listed that too, in the Failing to do that-paragraph. But I really consider it weird (and wrong, really) that

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread Nicholas Bamber
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David, How about python binary - mysql-utilities-diff perl binary - mysql-schema-compare On 09/03/12 22:52, David Paleino wrote: On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 22:44:03 +, Nicholas Bamber wrote: Another option might be to put Conflicts clauses in

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread David Paleino
On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 22:57:48 +, Nicholas Bamber wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David, How about python binary - mysql-utilities-diff perl binary - mysql-schema-compare That would break the scheme used by other binaries contained in mysql-utilities: $ dpkg -L

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread Adam D. Barratt
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 22:44 +, Nicholas Bamber wrote: Another option might be to put Conflicts clauses in both packages. That of course assumes that noone would ever want both. It would also be a violation of a policy must (10.1) and an inappropriate use of Conflicts, so would simply

Bug#663182: Possible solution

2012-03-09 Thread Dmitry Smirnov
I would like mysql-utilities not to be intrusive, for that reason I think it make sense to keep its executables 'mysql*' in private directory /usr/lib/mysql-utilities To me the fact that 'mysqldiff' provided by libmysql-diff-perl was in /usr/bin first is enough: it won't be fair to its users