Russell E Glaue wrote:
> I don't mean to say what way is wrong or right, but if a feature is added
> to MySQL, should not that feature comply with the design and strategy in
> which MySQL is built upon?
> If we are going to make the syntax similar to DB2, should we not do this
> for the entire database and not just one feature? Or lets edit the MySQL
> design model to explicitly support the integration of IBM DB2 grammer.
> To have the entire database compliant with a design model in which
> everyone follows, and then have one (or just a few) feature(s) sticking
> out differently seems a bit chaotic. -- It's not a part of the model, yet
> once in the code it will have to be supported for who knows how long.
> It's just my opinion that to have standards and a design model is to make
> sure the road in which technology is built on is straight and accurate and
> less breakable. It may not seem like a big deal to waiver from this model
> this one time for this feature, but if we are not strict and do not stick
> to this model, then what about the next time, and the time after that?
> Am I wrong?
> What do other people think about this issue?
We already have bits sticking out. See how we already have the
IMO, one can afford to be more agnostic and less insular in an
open-source database as long as it doesn't lead to too much bloat or
ANTONY T CURTIS