Status of mysqle

[Casey Link]

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Casey Link <unnamedrambler at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Casey Link <unnamedrambler at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Leo Franchi <lfranchi at kde.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 27, 2008, at 11:19 AM, Mark Kretschmann wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/27/08, Lydia Pintscher <lydia.pintscher at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 14:34, Dan Meltzer <parallelgrapefruit at gmail.com
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Jeff Mitchell
>>>>>> <kde-dev at emailgoeshere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Anyone know the current status?  If we're ever going to use mysqle
>>>>>>> instead of sqlite, we should be doing so before 2.0 hits, or it
>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>> quite difficult to change later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be a very bad idea to change now, with us getting well into
>>>>>> the beta cycle.  We should stick with what we know works for 2.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree. Changing it now is meh :/
>>>>> Edward was looking into it all but he seems to be MIA :(
>>>>> I hope he returns sooner rather than later.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we have no choice but to delay it at least until 2.1. Sucks.
>>>>> Other opinions?
>>>>
>>>> I agree as well.
>>>
>>> At this point, i think we really have no other option. We can;t
>>> introduce such a massive change as that between betas....
>>>
>>
>> As long as the change comes soon-ish. Users with large collections (me
>> included) suffer greatly when forced to use sqllite.
>>
>> Also, there is another feature regresion that I haven't seen mentioned
>> yet. With 2.0 users won't be able to share their collections across
>> multiple computers while keeping their collection database on one
>> machine. And the answer to this isn't "Use ampache", because (1)
>> Ampache is much more overhead (php, httpd, etc), (2) the Ampache
>> service isn't a fully supported collection in terms of the Query
>> Maker. That is, Ampache tracks can't be used universally in playlists,
>> dynamic playlists, etc.
>>
>> Casey
>>

Bah. Pushed Send on accident.

Jeff Wrote:
> Browsing the amarok list I found the thread "Amarok support of MySQL Embedded"
> It looks like someone has already (sortof) gotten mysqle working.
>
> My point really was that it's a massive change between betas perhaps,
> but it'd be an equally massive change from 2.0 to 2.1 if that is when we
> were to migrate.  If mysqle was going to be usable anytime soon, it
> might be better to push back release slightly and get it in now than to
> try to have everyone converted to sqlite for 2.0, then converted again
> to mysqle for 2.1.

I agree. We should assess how close Edward Hades (the poster mentioned
before) has achieved mysqle integration, and then decide whether it's
worth adding to 2.0. A major database backend switch belongs in a
major release not a major and the next minor (which would be the case
if we delay mysqle), unless it can be pulled off seamlessly.

Casey