Michael Shigorin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 06:12:45PM +0200, Colin Charles wrote:
>>> I think this is the worst case for the user, and would hurt
>>> not only the "commercial Enterprise users" but all users, as
>>> they then get a much less-maintained version of MySQL with
>>> more delayed bug fixes.
>> Since distributions don't normally *ship* every month, how does
>> this make it worse for our user base?
>
> updates/
And what is wrong with once every 3 months? Most sensible distribution
maintainers ship updates conservatively, and if you're updating core
software, you do so *very* conservatively
Now, lets go to the mainstream/sensible Linux distribution list (70% of
machines, according to robbat2, and from my experience with
distributions and our bug count stats, they actually match up):
* Debian
* Ubuntu
* Fedora/RHEL
* SuSE
Even *before* MySQL decided to release a source tarball every 3 months
once, these distros never shipped every incremental release of MySQL.
They did so when there was a security risk. Or when it seemed
appropriate for an update
An update for an updates sake is a maintainers worst nightmare. I know,
I've maintained software in a mainstream distribution before. Everytime
you drop an update, you increase the bug/pain count
Typically, Linux distributions release a new version once every 6 months
or 9 months, which seems normal. Updates are usually sparse (and if we
really want to argue otherwise, we'll have to go back and mine relevant
data, which isn't hard to do, but time consuming) especially for
critical applications
With the exception of Fedora, which might get a new kernel every couple
of weeks once, the others in the list are a lot more conservative about
releases
kind regards
--
Colin Charles, Community Relations Manager, APAC
MySQL AB, Melbourne, Australia, www.mysql.com
Mobile: +614 12 593 292 / Ekiga/Skype/Gizmo: colincharles
Web: http://www.bytebot.net/blog/
MySQL Forge: http://forge.mysql.com/
