[debian-mysql] Mysql 5.6 for experimental?

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from Nicholas Bamber's message of Thu Apr 12 12:04:30 -0700 2012:
> On 12/04/12 11:39, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Nicholas Bamber<nicholas at periapt.co.uk>  wrote:
> >>         You probably want to build up your commitment slowly. So I would say
> >> the first step is can you download the Debian source from the svn repository
> >> and build it. If it fails you could email this list. I think we would want
> >> the full build log as an attachment. I don't think the instructions for
> >> building from the repository are perfect but I managed to work them so they
> >> cannot be too bad. ;-)
> >>
> >>         I you get past that stage you could try sending BTS patches for bugs
> >> and where necessary showing how the bug can be reproduced.
> >
> > Is there a todo list for 5.5?
> >
> > Olaf
> 
> 
> Olaf,
>     As far as I have discussed it with Clint the priorities are:
> 1.) Modernize debian/rules

Indeed, this is long overdue. I'd also like to revisit some of the
maintainer scripts as they seem to be a source of problems for some users.

> 2.) Upgrade to the latest version.

5.5.22 is out now, but 5.5.23 has another security fix specified. So
I think we should probably focus on 5.5.23 (though it is not out yet,
I believe it should arrive soon).

> 3.) Import patches from Ubuntu.
> 
> I personally would add
> 4.) Check that the debian/copyright is all good, DEP-5 and lintian clean.

Note that I did an *exhaustive* rebuilding of the entire debian/copyright
file when I first packaged 5.5. I have a patch for licensecheck2dep5 to
make it build a copyright file more like the one that is there. I hope
to get those into Debian at some point so we can use them to build dep5
(or whatever its called now) copyright files automatically.

Until then, I hope to add some checking in debian/rules that will help
us identify when licensecheck thinks there are any changes that we might
need to make to debian/copyright. Seems like this would be a useful
thing for all packages to have actually.

> 5.) Fix any easy to fix low impact bugs.
> 
> If they are familar and comfortable with debhelper in all its glory I 
> don't see why someone should not offer a patch for 1.) It would be a big 
> help and timesaver.
> 
> If Clint were to disappear, Clint please don't do that, I would tackle 
> them in this order:

I have been a little invisible lately, but will reappear in earnest soon
with 12.04 releasing in 2 weeks.

> 
> 4.)
> 1.)
> 2.)
> 5.)
> 3.) never unless people offered these as patches in BTS.
> 

The stuff I've done in Ubuntu has been really important stuff, like
files that are missing and such.

I'd like to get the package in sync for the next release. The only real
intentional difference in Ubuntu is the upstart job and the -core packages
which allow users to install mysqld or /usr/bin/mysql without having the
full service configuration. I believe we can put conditional logic in
the package to make the upstart job on part of the Ubuntu package until
Debian supports upstart. Then I can start working primarily in Debian and
just syncing to Ubuntu, which should be better for Debian and for Ubuntu.