Comments for worldgonemad.com

Comment on MySQL spins and forks by Jay Pipes

Jay Pipes — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:37:38 +0000

Spork?

Comment on MySQL spins and forks by Brian Aker

Brian Aker — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:10:07 +0000

Hi!

I keep thinking that eventually the deltas will get tired of porting their changes between versions. We gave up very early on the idea of collecting patches from the MySQL tree. In retrospect? I am very happy we did that. It has allowed for a lot of flow in innovation that would not have happened otherwise.

Cheers,
-Brian

Comment on MySQL spins and forks by pantoniades

pantoniades — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:00:25 +0000

@Henrik I would say in the future you could become a fork, but not retroactively. Forkness is not permenant – egcs is no longer a fork, for example.

Comment on MySQL spins and forks by Roland Bouman

Roland Bouman — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 20:22:30 +0000

How about “patched up version”? “Faux-fork”? just offering

roland.

Comment on MySQL spins and forks by Henrik Ingo

Henrik Ingo — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:46:34 +0000

You are absolutely right that other than Drizzle, the other MySQL incarnations are not “forks”. Otoh ESR is right that the word “fork” is commonly used also for what MariaDB and XtraDB are.

Monty tries to say that MariaDB is a branch of MySQL, since it is not a fork. I haven’t quite got attached to that either, since branch make me think of bzr, git and other distributed scm’s. Good luck proposing “spins”, if it catches on I’ll use it, if not… I guess it is fork?

Btw, one perspective to this is that you cannot observe “history in the making”. So if 5 years from now we still exchange code and remain compatible, then no, it wasn’t a fork. If 5 years from now we are separate codebases, then yes, this was already the fork.

I’m apparently in a philosphical mood. Will go tosleep now.

Comment on How I stopped worrying and learned to love Twitter by Giuseppe Maxia

Giuseppe Maxia — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:51:03 +0000

@pantoniades: I have been there before
http://datacharmer.blogspot.com/2009/03/forums-are-for-sissies-next-thing-is.html

Comment on How I stopped worrying and learned to love Twitter by Steve Curry

Steve Curry — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:00:11 +0000

Phillip & Phriends:

Follow the @MySQL twitter account at http://twitter.com/mysql

The MySQL Community Team has their own handle at http://twitter.com/mysql_community

Comment on Is the 64bit desktop really still so far off? by James McPherson

James McPherson — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 04:01:18 +0000

I have no problems with flash inside firefox3 on OpenSolaris. Ditto for webex. I don’t use skype, and if I wanted to try the VoIP thing I’d got with ekiga. I believe you can also run skype inside an lx-branded zone. You might even be able to run it inside VirtualBox. You know that OpenSolaris is a tier-1 host platform for VirtualBox, right?

Comment on Is the 64bit desktop really still so far off? by Philip Antoniades

Philip Antoniades — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:19:02 +0000

I love opensolaris – I do! – but the problem I run into there is still a lack of third-party or community support (so far). Skype? Flash? Webex?

@192.18.101.5 – You are right, I really don’t care about application "bitness" if it’s not using >4G of RAM (and nothing should on this box!). It’s the "new source of instability" that I mind. Maybe it’s 32bit Skype accessing a 64bit Video4Linux layer – I don’t pretend to know. But more things broke.

Comment on Is the 64bit desktop really still so far off? by Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 15:35:42 +0000

I second the first anon poster. It’s nice that you comment on OpenSuse and Fedora, but you really ought to try OpenSolaris as well — you’ll like what you see, provided that you first understand that just because the kernel is 64-bit doesn’t mean that all apps should also be 64-bit.

I also second Phillip Wagstrom — what’s crucial is that the *kernel* run in 64-bit mode and that apps that would benefit from being 64-bit also be 64-bit. I don’t see why Skype needs to be 64-bit, for example — can you clarify?