[debian-mysql] [MBF] mysql meta-packages

[Robie Basak]

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 07:40:12AM +0200, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:
> 2016-12-16 1:57 GMT+02:00 Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu at debian.org>:
> > That only leaves Packages depending on mysql-{client,server}, but there are
> > quite a few of those (if we count depends & recommends & suggests). If we make
> > mariadb-{client,server}-10.0 (temporarily) provide mysql-{client,server}, then
> > we don't need to file RC bugs for that right now. We could still file those bugs
> > at severity important now, and eventually bump that to RC and drop those
> > provides... but we don't have the pressure to do it all now.
> >
> > What do you think?
> 
> Maybe, but on the other hand it is good that package maintainers
> aknowledge the change and possibly even test it to iron out any
> regressions (rare, but I guess could be possible).

I agree.

We've had one or two mainainters arrive on the list complaining about
differences between the two. With a general "well then they're not
drop-in replacements" response, and I believe some changes required on
their end to compensate. Since we know they don't behave exactly the
same from the perspective of being a dependency, I think dependent
package maintainers should state exactly what behaviour they support
using the dependency. Say "Depends: mysql-server" and you declare that
you expect mysql-server's behaviour, and similarly for mariadb-server.
Saying "Depends: default-mysql-server" implies that you support both
behaviours, which I think is distinct and different and so should be a
statement made explicitly by maintainers, rather than by us doing it for
them (and on some occasions being wrong).

Robie
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mysql-maint/attachments/20161216/1df0b708/attachment.sig>