Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:55113
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain phpdoc.de from 212.227.126.187 cause and error)
Message-ID: <4E6146D9.9050402@phpdoc.de>
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 23:12:57 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <1314966424.2150.26.camel@guybrush>  <4E60F712.4010901@lerdorf.com> <4E612BBA.2000509@oracle.com>  <4E612D70.70606@sugarcrm.com> <1314994484.2150.49.camel@guybrush>  <4E613ECC.2010007@sugarcrm.com>  <CAH-PCH6CxJ31qmsVDDSvF2NAX72hfJ0nTdYCe3+24Fv9L01eig@mail.gmail.com>  <4E61401C.1060009@sugarcrm.com>  <CAH-PCH6vDQhkrK7YCj9xiv8FH9MRxk4yq2ehu_=fmM26ZorszQ@mail.gmail.com> <1314997040.2150.61.camel@guybrush>
In-Reply-To: <1314997040.2150.61.camel@guybrush>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Make mysqlnd default over libmysql in 5.4
From: ulf.wendel@phpdoc.de (Ulf Wendel)

Am 02.09.2011 22:57, schrieb Johannes Schlüter:
> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 22:48 +0200, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Stas Malyshev<smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>  wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On 9/2/11 1:41 PM, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think you missed the referenced [1]:
>>>>
>>>> [1] Yes, we will still allow building with libmysql and we will fix bugs
>>>> reported there and we will verify it works but focus on mysqlnd, as
>>>> we're actually handling it already
>>>
>>> I did not miss it - I do not see what it means. Either we support both - and
>>> then for the matter of development and testing nothing changes - or
>>> something changes, namely "we remove one moving piece out of the test
>>> equation", the moving piece being libmysql - and "remove" means "remove". I
>>> just don't see how you can have both of these things at the same time.
>>
>> I think that Johannes means that mysqld would be the preferred or
>> baseline for the mysql tests.
>> maybe supporting IE6 would be a good metaphor: you could say that you
>> support every browser equally, or you could say that you write your
>> stuff for the modern browsers and tests it against IE6 and fix where
>> necessary.
>> Johannes, is this what you had in mind?
>
> Thanks, I like your analogy and don't have a better one.


Let's see if I get it right.

Johannes and I say:

  - libmysql support is there and it will stay there
  - libmysql shall continue to be supported
  - tests shall be written in a portable way, whenever possible

We furthermore said, let me put it straigt:

  - we failed to catch some libmysql/MySQL/test version combination 
portability issues - shit happens, sorry for that
  - testing any extension that has external dependencies is a pain

I think, such a statement is quite a big step towards your test 
concerns, Stas. Ultimately, I still don't get what you (Stas) are after 
with the test discussion. Have I missed any of your worries?

Ulf