Re: [debian-mysql] Request for release team decision on MySQL and MariaDB [was: Re: Bug#793316: Bug#793316: transition: mysql-5.6]

[Pedretti Fabio <pedretti.fabio@gmail.com>]

2016-01-07 15:49 GMT+01:00 Norvald H. Ryeng <norvald.ryeng@oracle.com>:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 22:31:05 +0100, Robie Basak <robie.basak@ubuntu.com> wrote:

20:13:13 <pochu> 3- we have two forks of the same codebase

That's not something upstream can do anything about. And if having
forks is a problem, why wasn't that issue raised when MariaDB was
accepted into Debian?

Debian carries other forks, e.g.:

 - GNU Emacs and XEmacs
 - djbdns and dbndns
 - FreeMind and Freeplane
 - Nagios and Icinga

I don't see any reason why MySQL and MariaDB should be any different
from other software.

 Note however that for other debian packaged softwares a choice was made, here are some I just remember:

- openoffice / libreoffice

- xfree86 / xorg

- libav / ffmpeg

Actually mariadb and mysql can be used as alternative, but what should do in the future packages depending on them when they'll start to diverge?
Specify just one of them as an explicit requirement? But then some packages depending on one cannot be installed along packages depending on the other because mariadb and mysql cannot installed at the same time?
Or just use a set of common features compatible with both, possibly being unoptimal with both? And which one should users install?

I think that in the interest of Debian a choice should be made, as it was recently made with the libav / ffmpeg alternatives. Also other distros already did a choice. Users needing the other can still install from a 3rd party repository.

Note: I am not a Debian developer, just a user.