<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: News flash: MySQL 5.1 has zero bugs</title>
	<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/</link>
	<description>Stay curious!</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 04:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Xaprb</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14569</link>
		<author>Xaprb</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 01:54:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14569</guid>
		<description>Zach, I figured you were misquoted like that.  Thanks for writing in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zach, I figured you were misquoted like that.  Thanks for writing in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ZUrlocker</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14566</link>
		<author>ZUrlocker</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 19:28:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14566</guid>
		<description>Since, I'm the guy who got quoted, let me tell you what I really told eWeek.  I said that there were zero customer reported unfixed P1 bugs in the 5.1 RC at the time I spoke with the reporter.  

All non-trivial software has bugs, but my point was that the RC release is looking pretty good.  And of course, it all depends on the inflow of bugs.  So if folks want to test out the latest 5.1 RC and find bugs, that would be helpful.  Better if we find them sooner rather than later and we always appreciate the help.  

Sorry it took a while to respond to this posting; I was on vacation at the time.

--Zack</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since, I&#8217;m the guy who got quoted, let me tell you what I really told eWeek.  I said that there were zero customer reported unfixed P1 bugs in the 5.1 RC at the time I spoke with the reporter.  </p>
<p>All non-trivial software has bugs, but my point was that the RC release is looking pretty good.  And of course, it all depends on the inflow of bugs.  So if folks want to test out the latest 5.1 RC and find bugs, that would be helpful.  Better if we find them sooner rather than later and we always appreciate the help.  </p>
<p>Sorry it took a while to respond to this posting; I was on vacation at the time.</p>
<p>&#8211;Zack</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Xaprb</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14511</link>
		<author>Xaprb</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 18:59:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14511</guid>
		<description>The original article is such utter word salad anyway.  "released to general availability a near-final release candidate of Version 5.1"  What?  Is it GA, or is it just a GA RC?  Is the author perhaps the &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caitlin_Upton" rel="nofollow"&gt;winner of a beauty pageant&lt;/a&gt;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The original article is such utter word salad anyway.  &#8220;released to general availability a near-final release candidate of Version 5.1&#8243;  What?  Is it GA, or is it just a GA RC?  Is the author perhaps the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caitlin_Upton" rel="nofollow">winner of a beauty pageant</a>?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VadimTk</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14510</link>
		<author>VadimTk</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 17:19:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14510</guid>
		<description>Sergei,

So your classification of bug recalls me old Chinese taxonomy

Animals are divided into:
 
# those that belong to the Emperor,
# embalmed ones,
# those that are trained,
# suckling pigs,
# mermaids,
# fabulous ones,
# stray dogs,
# those included in the present classification,
# those that tremble as if they were mad,
# innumerable ones,
# those drawn with a very fine camelhair brush,
# others,
# those that have just broken a flower vase,
# those that from a long way off look like flies

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_Emporium_of_Benevolent_Knowledge's_Taxonomy)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sergei,</p>
<p>So your classification of bug recalls me old Chinese taxonomy</p>
<p>Animals are divided into:</p>
<p># those that belong to the Emperor,<br />
# embalmed ones,<br />
# those that are trained,<br />
# suckling pigs,<br />
# mermaids,<br />
# fabulous ones,<br />
# stray dogs,<br />
# those included in the present classification,<br />
# those that tremble as if they were mad,<br />
# innumerable ones,<br />
# those drawn with a very fine camelhair brush,<br />
# others,<br />
# those that have just broken a flower vase,<br />
# those that from a long way off look like flies</p>
<p>(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_Emporium_of_Benevolent_Knowledge&#8217;s_Taxonomy)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sergei Golubchik</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14509</link>
		<author>Sergei Golubchik</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 16:27:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14509</guid>
		<description>All at once.

Explaining how Zack came to his "zero bugs" result. Defending the practice of giving different priorities to different bugs. Laughing at the absurd "zero bugs" conclusion coming from taking this practice to an extreme.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All at once.</p>
<p>Explaining how Zack came to his &#8220;zero bugs&#8221; result. Defending the practice of giving different priorities to different bugs. Laughing at the absurd &#8220;zero bugs&#8221; conclusion coming from taking this practice to an extreme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Xaprb</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14508</link>
		<author>Xaprb</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 16:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14508</guid>
		<description>Sergei, I can't tell whether you're defending, explaining, or laughing at the article I referred to.  Or maybe something else?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sergei, I can&#8217;t tell whether you&#8217;re defending, explaining, or laughing at the article I referred to.  Or maybe something else?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sergei Golubchik</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14507</link>
		<author>Sergei Golubchik</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 12:40:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14507</guid>
		<description>Make no mistake - categorizing and prioritizing bugs is the right way to do. And fixing crashing bugs or non-working ORDER BY before, say, duplicate warning for out-of-range variable assignment is correct. And I'll be the first to declare a very weird behavior "not a bug" if it's documented or at least intended (and I did - check bugdb :).

But saying that because of this "MySQL has zero bugs" is ridiculous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Make no mistake - categorizing and prioritizing bugs is the right way to do. And fixing crashing bugs or non-working ORDER BY before, say, duplicate warning for out-of-range variable assignment is correct. And I&#8217;ll be the first to declare a very weird behavior &#8220;not a bug&#8221; if it&#8217;s documented or at least intended (and I did - check bugdb :).</p>
<p>But saying that because of this &#8220;MySQL has zero bugs&#8221; is ridiculous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sergei Golubchik</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14506</link>
		<author>Sergei Golubchik</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 12:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14506</guid>
		<description>That's easy - of course there're "zero bugs". Depends on the criteria.

Looking at the bugdb everybody can see there're tons of bugs. There's no way to fix them all in any reasonable time frame. What could a management do ? Categorize them. These are low-impact, for these there's a trivial workaround, these are more an annoyance than a real bug. What's left ? Okay, these are too difficult to fix, we cannot risk doing major changes in 5.0 or 5.1, these affect only a handful of users, these behave as documented even if it's confusing, these behave as intended we should just document this weird behavior. What else ? Yeah, unfortunately this is a crash caused by a simple query, looks like we have to fix it. And in this one ORDER BY doesn't seem to work, cannot declare its "not a bug". Now let's tag all bugs that managed to stay "real bugs" no matter how hard we tried to avoid fixing them.

And when all tagged bugs are fixed - one can proudly say "MySQL has zero bugs". Indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s easy - of course there&#8217;re &#8220;zero bugs&#8221;. Depends on the criteria.</p>
<p>Looking at the bugdb everybody can see there&#8217;re tons of bugs. There&#8217;s no way to fix them all in any reasonable time frame. What could a management do ? Categorize them. These are low-impact, for these there&#8217;s a trivial workaround, these are more an annoyance than a real bug. What&#8217;s left ? Okay, these are too difficult to fix, we cannot risk doing major changes in 5.0 or 5.1, these affect only a handful of users, these behave as documented even if it&#8217;s confusing, these behave as intended we should just document this weird behavior. What else ? Yeah, unfortunately this is a crash caused by a simple query, looks like we have to fix it. And in this one ORDER BY doesn&#8217;t seem to work, cannot declare its &#8220;not a bug&#8221;. Now let&#8217;s tag all bugs that managed to stay &#8220;real bugs&#8221; no matter how hard we tried to avoid fixing them.</p>
<p>And when all tagged bugs are fixed - one can proudly say &#8220;MySQL has zero bugs&#8221;. Indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Burton</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14505</link>
		<author>Kevin Burton</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 06:59:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14505</guid>
		<description>I think he meant zarro boogs:

"The response "zarro boogs" is intended as a buggy statement itself, implying that even when no bugs have been identified, software is still likely to contain bugs that haven't been identified yet."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think he meant zarro boogs:</p>
<p>&#8220;The response &#8220;zarro boogs&#8221; is intended as a buggy statement itself, implying that even when no bugs have been identified, software is still likely to contain bugs that haven&#8217;t been identified yet.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14504</link>
		<author>paul</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 06:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.xaprb.com/blog/2008/05/02/news-flash-mysql-51-has-zero-bugs/#comment-14504</guid>
		<description>If its true, then it would be has "0 known bugs", as complex software always has bugs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If its true, then it would be has &#8220;0 known bugs&#8221;, as complex software always has bugs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
