| From: | Christopher Petrilli <petrilli(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Thoughts on MySQL and InnoDB |
| Date: | 2005-12-02 13:50:05 |
| Message-ID: | 59d991c40512020550k3bffd5eavf30a515f1f5dba90@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 12/1/05, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> > Well, reading the changelog history apparently they call 5.0.15 from
> > Oct.19th "Release", so all previous versions were Beta. I wonder how
> > many MySQL 5.0 users are aware of that...
>
> Er ... hmmmm ... so that means they have happy feature mucking during
> BETA? This is unprofessional. BETA phase without feature freeze ... what
> kind of hobby coders did they hire?
The issue for me, personally, is that it can often be nearly
impossible to know if 5.0.15 is actually a release code, or if it's
beta. In addition, it's nearly impossible to know if 5.0.14 and 5.0.15
are "compatible". I'm still old-school, and believe that .z releases
should *never* introduce new functionality. That's a .y release.
For me, it's just a demonstration of sloppy practices in release
management. Honestly, MySQL just has too damned many releases.
Chris
--
| Christopher Petrilli
| petrilli(at)gmail(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2005-12-02 14:59:42 | Re: 8.1 pdf |
| Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2005-12-02 09:38:56 | Re: Thoughts on MySQL and InnoDB |