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
On 02/16/2012 10:24 PM, Stewart Smith wrote:
> The benefit of Percona Server is in having [...]
> and features to better help you diagnose what's going on
> inside your server.
Not to take sides in a complex multi-sided argument with many factors to
consider, but from a practical getting-business-
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, 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
I really think Alex ahas a point. It does not matter what the technical
arguments are. The techie will not be able to explain them adequately to
the guy making the decisions - who only knows that he is running a MySQL
shop.
Could we adopt the following scheme:
mysql-X depends on mysql-X-5.1 | ma
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
-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
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
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!
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
13 matches
Mail list logo
