[debian-mysql] percona vs. mariadb

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from Clint Byrum's message of 2013-03-07 10:26:57 -0800:
> Excerpts from Jonathan Aquilina's message of 2013-03-07 00:35:55 -0800:
> > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Bjoern Boschman <bjoern at boschman.de> wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > >
> > > Am 07.03.2013 09:24, schrieb Jonathan Aquilina:
> > > > In regards to percona, for what i have see all one needs to really do is
> > > > add the percona repository as the packages already exist there. What
> > > > else from the debian side would need to be done?
> > >
> > > for me (and most debian users) it's still a difference if I'm using an
> > > external repository or the official debian repo.
> > >
> > > additionally on the percona repo you will immediately hit into version
> > > upgrades. so there is no real stable branch afaik which is one of the
> > > most important things to me for using debian stable
> > >
> [fixed top post]
> > Arent those upgrades mostly security and bug fixes?
> > 
> 
> Yes, they are. The Percona Repo's are going to move forward at about the
> same rate as the Debian stable-security repos because thats the world
> Oracle has built for MySQL and Percona sits downstream from Oracle.
> 
> Actually I'm not so down on that. It turns out Oracle is doing a good
> job of not breaking too many things in these stable updates. I only
> don't like the opaque nature of things which leave Debian's users in an
> unfamiliar position of not knowing for sure if they are vulnerable or not.

And as I re-read that now, I am reminded that its not so much "good" as
"ok" They did, after all, regress a replication crash while fixing another
security issue (an issue already patched by MariaDB devs in a better way).
That, in fact, is why we are stuck at 5.5.28 in testing right now.