Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?

[sparta0]

In short, why not give people the option?  I for one like an all in one download and auto configuration.

Its always good avoiding being a Jack of all trades and master on none. The IDE still needs some working. Its always good to live stuff to the pros, addressing an issue peace meal negativity affects user experience because of user expectations.

On 18/01/2008, darrinps@... <darrinps@...> wrote:

So I take it all of you folks are in favor of removing the Glassfish installation?

IMHO, if you are going to provide a database anyway, and you have access to one like MySQL, then you should allow it as an optional install instead of your only option being Derby (which I am not a fan of).

In short, why not give people the option?  I for one like an all in one download and auto configuration.




---- Alex <swissalex90@...> wrote:

=============
Sipathamandla <sipatha <at> gmail.com> writes:

>
>
> No offense, but don't you think bringing a fully-fledged SQL server withan
IDE is a bit too much over-kill? Personally, I'd rather like to see a
> small, embeddable DB suitable for desktop applications as well (JavaDBis
okay here, maybe hsql or something similar to sqlite would be evenbetter...).
>
> Seconded. I think the current JDBC driver is convenient and fair enough when
accessing MySQL, i don't see any value addition bundling it with the IDE other
than bloating the downloads. The NetBeans team should be left to develop and
fix issues on the only IDE i need. Actual i think most features in NetBeans
should come as plugins, this keeps a lean and fast IDE that has functionality
the u can easily add/remove.
> Sun should concentrate on improving MySQL data recovery tools, transaction
management and user support so that it can penetrate deeper into the
enterprise where the money is.Just my ZWD$0.02
>
> On 17/01/2008, Kristian Rink <kawazu <at> zimmer428.net> wrote:
> Gentlemen;PerfectReign schrieb:>> If not bundled, will it at least have
better out of the box support>> (come with the MySQL driver, etc.)?>> Sun is
buying MySQL?>> Coolness!  That would be awesome to have embedded MySQL in
Netbeans
> > available.No offense, but don't you think bringing a fully-fledged SQL
server withan IDE is a bit too much over-kill? Personally, I'd rather like to
see asmall, embeddable DB suitable for desktop applications as well (JavaDB
> is okay here, maybe hsql or something similar to sqlite would be
evenbetter...).Just my €0.02, of course...Cheers,Kristian
>
>
> -- ________________________________________________
>


err "Thirded" - Yep please *don't* include MySQL in the IDE. It's very easy to
install separately and I can only see problems when you have an existing db.

--
________________________________________________

[kawazu428]

Am Fri, 18 Jan 2008 5:55:27 -0800
schrieb <darrinps@...>:

> In short, why not give people the option?  I for one like an all in
> one download and auto configuration.

Yes, of course options are good. But generally I think one should
consider whether or not to actually provide such an option, or, put
another way, who would benefit from that:

- Talking about desktop applications, so far a lot of people I know
(both Java and non-Java developers) do their persistence of data using
some home-brewn file/xml/whatever-based storage mechanisms. In this
situation, introducing a consistent development framework including,
say, the Swing Application Framework and a lightweight database
engine (JavaDB, HSQL, sqlite, whatever) could provide them with a
better way of building applications, a better way of getting their job
done, and, asides this, introduce some kind of "Rapid Application
Development" feeling to NetBeans which made people run for Delphi
(building GUI apps that persist stuff in dBase files) aeons ago...

- Talking about anything server, I don't see no benefit in bundling it.
As soon as you're about to do "real-world" applications using any of
these (no matter whether application server or backend RDBMS), you will
have to think about a standalone installation, possibly a production
and a testbed system, and about integration of those to with your IDE
anyhow. A preinstalled local server doesn't help much here I guess.

So, I wonder who could actually benefit from having an SQL server
database bundled with an IDE installation, possibly even having
components depending on it to be installed locally?

Cheers,
Kristian

--
Kristian Rink * http://zimmer428.net * http://flickr.com/photos/z428/
jab: kawazu@... * icq: 48874445 * fon: ++49 176 2447 2771
"One dreaming alone, it will be only a dream; many dreaming together
is the beginning of a new reality." (Hundertwasser)

[darrinps-2]

---- Kristian Rink <kawazu@...> wrote:

>"Talking about anything server, I don't see no benefit in bundling it."

I disagree.  I think having Glassfish bundled is a very good thing and saves people a lot of time and makes going through the tutorials a lot faster.  Besides, just because you run a local instance doesn't mean that what you generate is bound to it...not at all.


>"So, I wonder who could actually benefit from having an SQL server
>database bundled with an IDE installation, possibly even having
>components depending on it to be installed locally?"

Well, all those who want to work the many tutorials that are MySQL based for one. Oh, and maybe some folks have more experience using MySQL than Derby...maybe some folks like MySQL better than Derby...etc., etc.

Look, if you are going to add a database anyway, why not allow the option to which one gets downloaded and installed?  I just don't see why anyone would want to refuse someone the option of having MySQL installed as the database that comes with NetBeans (as long as the resources are there to make this happen of course).  If the user wants Derby instead, then that's fine, but as for me (and several others it seems) giving us the option for MySQL is a welcome thing.

[Daniel Sheppard-2]

Well I'm not so sure this is an either/or situation.  The people who
actually do the integration may not be those who would otherwise develop
IDE functionality.  In other words, it could be developers from MySQL
who do the integration rather than the other way around.

That said, of far greater importance for me would be to have the support
of free-form projects and free-form web projects in particular.  That
however is likely to be a more challenging and time-consuming task than
MySQL integration.

Daniel Sheppard

-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Holmer [mailto:gholmer@...]
Sent: 18 January 2008 13:49
To: nbusers@...
Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?

Wade Chandler wrote:
> as we can't possibly embed 2,3, + RDBMSs in the IDE to me the best
> answer is neither. Let the IDE ship a few libraries for client
> connections and provide good support, but let the developers decide
> those they want to use.

+1, we don't even use the bundled Tomcat and GlassFish, although we're
running both on our servers.  There's no point in including databases
that people probably have installed already.  One lightweight,
embeddable one like Derby (suitable for the sample programs) I can see,
but let's don't have the kitchen sink.

--
____________________________________________________________
Glenn Holmer                          gholmer@...
Software Engineer                        phone: [phone]
Weyco Group, Inc.                          fax: [phone]

[Sean Carrick]

Look, folks, let's get down to the brass tacks here.  So far everyone has been looking at this integration specifically from "the ease of development" standpoint.  Now, for those developers who are using M$ Window$, having MySQL embedded with the IDE would probably not be a bad thing, so they can develop an application (desktop or web) that attaches to a *real* database server, instead of the DerbyDB system.  For those of us who run and develop on Linux, having MySQL embedded with the IDE wouldn't be that good of a thing, as we already (usually) have MySQL installed via our distro, configured and usable.  All of this is the "ease of development" standpoint.  However, I think that everyone is missing the bigger issue.

I don't know about anyone else, but for *most* (read, "all but one") of my projects, my clients usually already have a database server that they are used to, with a ton of data on it.  Now, some of those clients may have MySQL, some may have M$ SQL, some may be running PostGreSQL or DBII, or whatever.  If I'm developing with MySQL, sometimes, not often but sometimes, an stored procedure that I write on MySQL doesn't work as expected on other RDBMS.  With that in mind, I typically have all of the various SQL servers installed on my development machine and start/stop them as necessary based upon the server that my client uses.

Basically, what I'm saying is that our clients' needs should determine the way that we develop, not ease of development.  We all need to look at the issue of whether MySQL should be embedded with NetBeans from the "client-centric" standpoint.  Do we all want to force all of our clients to use MySQL, simply because MySQL is more convenient for us due to being embedded in our IDE of choice?  I say no!  I'm not saying that MySQL shouldn't be an *optional* install with the IDE, but it should *never, ever* be a _required_ component.  If we look at this question from a client-centric standpoint, I'm sure all of us will agree that having one particular SQL server embedded with out IDE would be a bad idea.  The only way that this would be a good idea is if Sun purchased *all* of the RDBMS systems and then NetBeans embedded all of them within the IDE.  You see, that would be ridiculous, but would keep all of us focused on our clients...Just my $0.02.

Cheers,

Sean Carrick
PekinSOFT Systems
PekinSOFT@...

On Jan 18, 2008 9:52 AM, Daniel Sheppard <D.Sheppard@...> wrote:

Well I'm not so sure this is an either/or situation.  The people who
actually do the integration may not be those who would otherwise develop
IDE functionality.  In other words, it could be developers from MySQL
who do the integration rather than the other way around.

That said, of far greater importance for me would be to have the support
of free-form projects and free-form web projects in particular.  That
however is likely to be a more challenging and time-consuming task than
MySQL integration.

Daniel Sheppard

-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Holmer [mailto:gholmer@...]
Sent: 18 January 2008 13:49
To: nbusers@...
Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?

Wade Chandler wrote:
> as we can't possibly embed 2,3, + RDBMSs in the IDE to me the best
> answer is neither. Let the IDE ship a few libraries for client
> connections and provide good support, but let the developers decide
> those they want to use.

+1, we don't even use the bundled Tomcat and GlassFish, although we're
running both on our servers.  There's no point in including databases
that people probably have installed already.  One lightweight,
embeddable one like Derby (suitable for the sample programs) I can see,
but let's don't have the kitchen sink.

--
____________________________________________________________
Glenn Holmer                          gholmer@...
Software Engineer                        phone: [phone]
Weyco Group, Inc.                          fax: [phone]

[Sergio Lopes-3]

I haven't read the all discussion as it somehow started to look that
it was going on in circles, and the main point of it centered in
embedding mysql int the IDE. I don't usually go for the Miscrosoft way
of doing things, but as I'm stating to use VS2005 more often, I have
to say the integrating, and not embedding, like Microsoft has done
with it's IDE and MSSQL is a nice thing to have.
I would like the possibility of choosing either to have mysql in the
download or to install it myself, and I would like the installer to
detect that mysql is already installed in my system and have use it,
like VS2005 installer does.
VS2005 uses alot of features based on MSSQL, there are various wizards
that speed up integration with the database server, like setting up
ASP.net to use Membership on some existing database, all done inside
the IDE, without having to fire up the MSSQL manager. That I would
like to have in Netbeans, a simpler way of setting my application to
use mysql, a more usable database browser, more tools that would allow
me to do almost everything I need without stepping out of the IDE.

To have it embedded in Netbeans would not be that good, as it was
stated before, I also have some of the tools already installed and
configured to work the way I want, mysql being one of them, having the
IDE's installer requesting me to install another version of an
existing tool is not something I crave for :)

I think my point goes down to more integration not embedding.

--
Best regards,

Sérgio Lopes

[Sean Carrick]

On Jan 18, 2008 10:37 AM, Sergio Lopes <knitter.is@...> wrote:

...but as I'm stating to use VS2005 more often, I have
to say the integrating, and not embedding, like Microsoft has done
with it's IDE and MSSQL is a nice thing to have.

Right...thank you for helping me with the point that I was making.  M$ likes to have their SQL server embedded and integrated with their IDE because, to Micro$oft's way of of thinking, they want people to become absolutely dependent upon their systems.  They don't want users to ever realize that they have a choice, because then the users *may* not choose Micro$oft, and Micro$oft does not want that to ever happen.

To have it embedded in Netbeans would not be that good, as it was
stated before, I also have some of the tools already installed and
configured to work the way I want, mysql being one of them, having the
IDE's installer requesting me to install another version of an
existing tool is not something I crave for :)

This was *exactly* what I was saying about not having the MySQL integration/embedding be a required part of the installation, like glassfish is.  What you had said earlier (accidentally deleted your statement, sorry) about having the installer check to see if MySQL is already installed, *before* it tries to install it, wouldn't be bad, though it would bloat the installer for those who already have MySQL on their system.

Cheers,

Sean Carrick
PekinSOFT Systems
PekinSOFT@...

[Tim Alberts]

Sean Carrick wrote:
> Look, folks, let's get down to the brass tacks here.  So far everyone
> has been looking at this integration specifically from "the ease of
> development" standpoint.  Now, for those developers who are using M$
> Window$, having MySQL embedded with the IDE would probably not be a
> bad thing, so they can develop an application (desktop or web) that
> attaches to a *real* database server, instead of the DerbyDB system.  For

I'm just not understanding the contempt people on this thread have for
JavaDB.  JavaDB which is apachy derby, which was IBM Cloudscape is an
extremely powerful, stable, and multi-platform database with standalone
and embedded capabilities.  It's 100% Java, that alone says perfection!

I'm not sure of the history and if I'm wrong I'm sure to be called on it
on no uncertain terms, but I'm pretty sure Cloudscape had support for
foreign keys before MySQL did.

'Stop picking on JavaDB!  Leave Java DB alone!'

[Michael Mellinger-3]

You don't have Netbeans on your servers either, right?  Servers are built differently. We are talking about the Developer Pack.  It should contain the kitchen sink, or at the very least an easy way to obtain and configure the various tools from within Netbeans.

On Jan 18, 2008 8:48 AM, Glenn Holmer <gholmer@...> wrote:

Wade Chandler wrote:
> as we can't possibly embed 2,3, + RDBMSs in the IDE to me the best
> answer is neither. Let the IDE ship a few libraries for client
> connections and provide good support, but let the developers decide
> those they want to use.

+1, we don't even use the bundled Tomcat and GlassFish, although we're
running both on our servers.  There's no point in including databases
that people probably have installed already.  One lightweight,
embeddable one like Derby (suitable for the sample programs) I can see,
but let's don't have the kitchen sink.

--
____________________________________________________________
Glenn Holmer                          gholmer@...
Software Engineer                        phone: [phone]
Weyco Group, Inc.                          fax: [phone]

[Glenn Holmer]

Michael Mellinger wrote:
> You don't have Netbeans on your servers either, right?  Servers are built
> differently. We are talking about the Developer Pack.  It should contain the
> kitchen sink, or at the very least an easy way to obtain and configure the
> various tools from within Netbeans.

The reason we don't use the embedded Tomcat and Glassfish is that we
want to be sure we are debugging and deploying to the exact same
version.  We debug our apps on external copies of these app servers from
within NetBeans, and it works great.  We set them up this way in the
"Services" tab.  You can deploy to an external copy, as well.

--
____________________________________________________________
Glenn Holmer                          gholmer@...
Software Engineer                        phone: [phone]
Weyco Group, Inc.                          fax: [phone]

[Chuck Davis-3]

And PostgreSQL blows them both out of the water!  Sun was getting
behind Postgres.  I wonder what will happen to that now?  They could
have supported or branded Postgres and had a real, competitive
offering in the DB areana.  Now they have another orphan.  One way to
waste a BILLION bucks!

As a shareholder I am NOT happy!!!

> I'm just not understanding the contempt people on this thread have for
> JavaDB.  JavaDB which is apachy derby, which was IBM Cloudscape is an
> extremely powerful, stable, and multi-platform database with standalone
> and embedded capabilities.  It's 100% Java, that alone says perfection!
>
> I'm not sure of the history and if I'm wrong I'm sure to be called on it
> on no uncertain terms, but I'm pretty sure Cloudscape had support for
> foreign keys before MySQL did.
>
> 'Stop picking on JavaDB!  Leave Java DB alone!'
>
>
>

[philvh]

Sun still supports Postgres from what they said.  I think they should.  They should hire as many Postgres developers as they can, and support both.  If they do it right, $1B won't be wasted.

----- Original Message ----

> From: Chuck Davis <cjgunzel@...>
> To: nbusers@...
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 12:50:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?
>
> And PostgreSQL blows them both out of the water!  Sun was getting
> behind Postgres.  I wonder what will happen to that now?  They could
> have supported or branded Postgres and had a real, competitive
> offering in the DB areana.  Now they have another orphan.  One way to
> waste a BILLION bucks!
>
> As a shareholder I am NOT happy!!!
>
> > I'm just not understanding the contempt people on this thread
> have
>

 for
> > JavaDB.  JavaDB which is apachy derby, which was IBM Cloudscape is an
> > extremely powerful, stable, and multi-platform database
> with
>
 standalone
> > and embedded capabilities.  It's 100% Java, that alone
> says
>
 perfection!
> >
> > I'm not sure of the history and if I'm wrong I'm sure to be called
> on
>
 it
> > on no uncertain terms, but I'm pretty sure Cloudscape had support for
> > foreign keys before MySQL did.
> >
> > 'Stop picking on JavaDB!  Leave Java DB alone!'
> >
> >
> >
>




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Michael Mellinger-3]

Beta was better than VHS too...  Postgres has not taken off like MySQL has.  Sun can still provide support for Postgres.  The market decides.  In the meantime, they certainly should do their best to take advantage of the market's interest in MySQL.

On Jan 18, 2008 12:50 PM, Chuck Davis <cjgunzel@...> wrote:

And PostgreSQL blows them both out of the water!  Sun was getting
behind Postgres.  I wonder what will happen to that now?  They could
have supported or branded Postgres and had a real, competitive
offering in the DB areana.  Now they have another orphan.  One way to
waste a BILLION bucks!

As a shareholder I am NOT happy!!!

[philvh]

----- Original Message ----
> From: Tim Alberts <talberts@...>
> To: nbusers@...
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 5:19:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?
>
> Nan Null wrote:
> > I agree.  However, it would be great if Java provides
> more
>
 functionality in JDBC.  
> I'm no expert, but seems pretty complete and standardized to me?
>

From my experience, many times, I have to write different code for MySQL and Oracle.  I also meant to talk about database admin as a whole, not database connection.  I may have missed this, but from what I know, JDBC allows you to do things after a connection to an existing database.  Can you use it to create a new database?  I see HSQLDB and Derby uses their own way of doing it (through the connection string), but none of them is standard.

Or add users and grant permission?  I know you can do that through SQL, but is it standard SQL for major databases?  I know the syntax can be standard (such as insert a user, or update a field).  Is it a same sql string to add a user to different databases?  The columns are not the same for a user table.

It would be nice to have an API to do that, and let the driver takes care of differences.

> > Such as standardize on creating databases and other
> administration
>
 stuffs.
> > Now Sun has MySQL, they're more interested in the inner working
> of
>
 it, and provide better Java support for all major database would
> be
>
 great.
> >  
> Every major database I can think of and every 'minor' database I can
> think of has a JDBC driver?
> > I also hope of a top not database admin/client GUI in Java.
> SQuirreL
>
 SQL is nice, but there are still alot to be desired.  sqldeveloper
> is
>
 nice, and I think most if not all of it is written in Java, but
> it's
>
 Oracle only.
> >  
> I can't argue with you there, if you find one or write one, let me
> know,  I'll use it.

I think Sun/Netbeans should provide this.  Netbeans current has some decent GUI, but not good enough.  If Sun pays me good, I'll create one for them.

> > Although setting up MySQL is easy, it would be great if it's
> much
>
 easier.  I just don't see why not.  It would be nice to unzip, and
> you
>
 have it.
> > Then double click to have an admin/client where you can create
> a
>
 database, add users, grant permission, setup to start as a service,
> etc.,
>
 all in one place.
> >  
> Have you tried the GUI tools freely available for MySQL, from MySQL?
> I
>
 
> use them all the time, seem pretty 'point and click' user friendly.
>
> http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/gui-tools/5.0.html
>
>

Last time I used the admin GUI on the Windows front, it was very bizarre, really bad in my opinion.




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Wade Chandler]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

I get what you are saying, but the problem is:

RDMS:
Apache Derby
Firebird
MySQL
PostgreSQL
MS SQL Server
DB2
Oracle XE and others
Sybase

EE Containers:
Glassfish

Websphere
JBoss
Weblogic

I'm sure there are others, so picking the ones to support means you leave others out. There is already a RDBMS supported which is easily cross-platform along with Glassfish the EE container and then there is Tomcat. Start adding others and some will want more, and sooner or later not much is done on different fronts to support the general technologies. I think if the IDE supports the clients well, drives etc, then the developer can easily enough get and setup their system as needed. Otherwise, super server versus classic with something like Firebird, database folders, ports, etc that the servers will run, and then not to mention cross-platform compatibility. 32-64, Mac, Linux, Solaris, Windows, etc.

At the end of the day is the project better off supporting the technologies and not spending so much time getting everything in the world in it, a Linux distro for instance, this is one of the biggest downsides Linux has going for it, how many times do you not use the version embedded within it and just install the base, and then go get your own...many times I'm sure, especially considering MySQL had changed their license and distros didn't even add MySQL 5 for a long time if not at all.

So, it is a lot of work for no real gain to a majority of folks in my opinion. Most won't use it and will use their own version anyways, so it really is time spent which could have been focused on something else. Linux on the desktop comes to mind for me...if all the Linux distros hadn't spent so much time focused on fixing and patching the same bugs in their own copies of open source projects instead of just working with other open-source projects to get packages in those projects for their distros they could have had more time and resources for bigger and better things, and this from a long time Linux user. I was using Slackware when Windows 95 was a glimmer in someones eye and had to watch all these companies and individuals spend so much time and energy on the same things over and over again.

Now, if the MySQL devs want to add a module to NB which one can get from auto-update then that would be cool. PostgreSQL and others might then follow suite. But, then that is a little different. Same kind of support yet supported by the other projects. Then it really doesn't take anything away from NB and the project as it won't impact other bugs and deliverables. This is after all only my opinion, but is it based on experience and watching the same thing occur over and over in the open source world. At the end of the day I think of all these projects took a poll they would find more users would rather have something else improved such as an editor, Java support, bean etc for IDES, better user interface, hardware, and installation support for desktop Linux (group effort from all to get good shortcut, menu, and other resource sharing between window managers and desktops comes to mind), and other projects...you name it.

Wade

==================
Wade Chandler, CCE
Software Engineer and Developer, Certified Forensic Computer Examiner, NetBeans Dream Team Member, and NetBeans Board Member
http://www.certified-computer-examiner.com
http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/view/NetBeansDreamTeam
http://www.netbeans.org

----- Original Message ----
From: Michael Mellinger <mmellinger66@...>
To: nbusers@...
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 12:31:01 PM
Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?

You don't have Netbeans on your servers either, right?  Servers are built differently. We are talking about the Developer Pack.  It should contain the kitchen sink, or at the very least an easy way to obtain and configure the various tools from within Netbeans.

[David Van Couvering-2]

Holy schmoly!  Quite a lot of opinions here!  It's great to see so
much passion and interest in databases and NetBeans!  Full disclosure:
I'm the Sun employee currently responsible for core database tooling
in NetBeans (e.g. the Database Explorer and Java DB support).

I personally don't think it's a good idea to bundle MySQL with
NetBeans.   If you've noticed, we actually don't bundle Java DB.  We
do detect it if it's on your system, either the one that's bundled in
JDK 6 or the one bundled in Glassfish (which *is* bundled with the
enterprise version of NetBeans).

There are a lot of other interesting ideas out there.  You're not the
only one asking me what we should do here or providing opinions.  I've
had a very busy last few days :)

I hope to gather up all your ideas, put them into some kind of
reasonable form, and get your votes on what we should be doing.  So
please send your ideas my way.

First step; let's brainstorm on ideas.  Send them to me, and not just
nbusers, or I may miss them.  I'll add them to the Wiki.  Or you can
add them directly to the Wiki.

We'll go from there.  I think database tooling for NetBeans just got a
little kick in the pants :)

David

P.S. For more on this please see
http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com/2008/01/netbeans-and-mysql-what-to-do.html

On Jan 17, 2008 10:33 AM,  <darrinps@...> wrote:
> Are there any plans to ship NetBeans with MySQL instead of JavaDB (which I have had...well...a fair share of problems with over the last few years) now that Sun is planning to buy MySQL?
>
> If not bundled, will it at least have better out of the box support (come with the MySQL driver, etc.)?
>
>
>
>



--
David W. Van Couvering
http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com

[Bayless Kirtley]

I agree that "database tooling" would be extremely useful as a tightly
woven part of Netbeans. I just don't see the practicality of bundling
any single database. It makes a lot more sense to me to build in real
overall  generic support sort of the equivalent of JDBC to Java. Let
Netbeans support database access and behavior but in such a way
that we developers can pick and choose the best engine for each
application. Also, as someone mentioned (I'm sorry, I forgot who)
in many if not most cases, our clients already have a database in
place and we have to develop to it. Where this is not the case, as
developers we probably already have a favorite that we might
prefer to use over whatever single option was available bundled.
I believe bundling just makes more work for most of us who would
more often than not, not be able to or want to use it anyway. For
example, I assume that I have some overhead in having JavaDB
built into my version of Netbeans. JavaDB will not work for my
application without a great deal of effort in rewriting that I am not
inclined to do.

Bayless

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Van Couvering" <david@...>
To: <nbusers@...>
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?

> Holy schmoly!  Quite a lot of opinions here!  It's great to see so
> much passion and interest in databases and NetBeans!  Full disclosure:
> I'm the Sun employee currently responsible for core database tooling
> in NetBeans (e.g. the Database Explorer and Java DB support).
>
> I personally don't think it's a good idea to bundle MySQL with
> NetBeans.   If you've noticed, we actually don't bundle Java DB.  We
> do detect it if it's on your system, either the one that's bundled in
> JDK 6 or the one bundled in Glassfish (which *is* bundled with the
> enterprise version of NetBeans).
>
> There are a lot of other interesting ideas out there.  You're not the
> only one asking me what we should do here or providing opinions.  I've
> had a very busy last few days :)
>
> I hope to gather up all your ideas, put them into some kind of
> reasonable form, and get your votes on what we should be doing.  So
> please send your ideas my way.
>
> First step; let's brainstorm on ideas.  Send them to me, and not just
> nbusers, or I may miss them.  I'll add them to the Wiki.  Or you can
> add them directly to the Wiki.
>
> We'll go from there.  I think database tooling for NetBeans just got a
> little kick in the pants :)
>
> David
>
> P.S. For more on this please see
> http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com/2008/01/netbeans-and-mysql-what-to-do.html
>
> On Jan 17, 2008 10:33 AM,  <darrinps@...> wrote:
>> Are there any plans to ship NetBeans with MySQL instead of JavaDB (which
>> I have had...well...a fair share of problems with over the last few
>> years) now that Sun is planning to buy MySQL?
>>
>> If not bundled, will it at least have better out of the box support (come
>> with the MySQL driver, etc.)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> David W. Van Couvering
> http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.6/1231 - Release Date: 1/18/2008
> 11:55 AM
>
>

[Sean Carrick]

Bayless,

     That was me that you cited...Thanks for giving credence to what I said. ;-)

Group,

     Even after what I posted earlier, I still see a lot of comments that are looking at this from an ease-of-development standpoint and not from a client-centric standpoint.  Wade Chandler, IMHO, hit the nail on the head when he mentioned that every developer has his/her favorite tools and *all* of them can't be included in the IDE.  Therefore, I think that the database team should just continue to improve the JDBC API for use with whatever SQL back-end the developer chooses to use, or client already has in use.  This would be a better allocation of resources than trying to embed or integrate MySQL (which is only one of *many* quality SQL servers available, BTW) into NetBeans.  Also, Wade was right about what could then happen to the MySQL tree when there is one branch going off on the primary track and the other going off on the NetBeans track.  Having been in Linux since RH 5.2, I can concur with Wade about the way the various Open Source projects have ended up with their CVS  root not looking like a tree, so much as it looks like a web.  When each distro started creating their own "version" of OpenOffice.org, for example, you had one distro that had better support for one feature and another distro with better support for a different feature, when the best solution would have been for those distros to have collaborated so that OpenOffice.org would be improved as a whole.  This same kind of situation could continue to happen (yes, it's already happened, look at the version on Fedora 7, compared to the version on openSuSE 10.2) to MySQL if it starts being embedded/integrated into NetBeans.  However, now that Sun has purchased MySQL, maybe they will be able to bring all of the various tracks the Linux distros have pushed MySQL into back into one main stream of releases.  It would be nice to see this happen.  Oh well, just another $0.02 from me...

Cheers,

Sean Carrick
PekinSOFT Systems
PekinSOFT@...

On Jan 18, 2008 9:29 PM, Bayless Kirtley <bkirt@...> wrote:

I agree that "database tooling" would be extremely useful as a tightly
woven part of Netbeans. I just don't see the practicality of bundling
any single database. It makes a lot more sense to me to build in real
overall  generic support sort of the equivalent of JDBC to Java. Let
Netbeans support database access and behavior but in such a way
that we developers can pick and choose the best engine for each
application. Also, as someone mentioned (I'm sorry, I forgot who)
in many if not most cases, our clients already have a database in
place and we have to develop to it. Where this is not the case, as
developers we probably already have a favorite that we might
prefer to use over whatever single option was available bundled.
I believe bundling just makes more work for most of us who would
more often than not, not be able to or want to use it anyway. For
example, I assume that I have some overhead in having JavaDB
built into my version of Netbeans. JavaDB will not work for my
application without a great deal of effort in rewriting that I am not
inclined to do.

Bayless

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Van Couvering" <david@...>
To: <nbusers@...>

Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: [nbusers] Can we expect to see MySQL in NB soon?

> Holy schmoly!  Quite a lot of opinions here!  It's great to see so

> much passion and interest in databases and NetBeans!  Full disclosure:
> I'm the Sun employee currently responsible for core database tooling
> in NetBeans (e.g. the Database Explorer and Java DB support).
>
> I personally don't think it's a good idea to bundle MySQL with
> NetBeans.   If you've noticed, we actually don't bundle Java DB.  We
> do detect it if it's on your system, either the one that's bundled in
> JDK 6 or the one bundled in Glassfish (which *is* bundled with the
> enterprise version of NetBeans).
>
> There are a lot of other interesting ideas out there.  You're not the
> only one asking me what we should do here or providing opinions.  I've
> had a very busy last few days :)
>
> I hope to gather up all your ideas, put them into some kind of
> reasonable form, and get your votes on what we should be doing.  So
> please send your ideas my way.
>
> First step; let's brainstorm on ideas.  Send them to me, and not just
> nbusers, or I may miss them.  I'll add them to the Wiki.  Or you can
> add them directly to the Wiki.
>

> We'll go from there.  I think database tooling for NetBeans just got a

> little kick in the pants :)
>
> David
>
> P.S. For more on this please see
> http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com/2008/01/netbeans-and-mysql-what-to-do.html
>
> On Jan 17, 2008 10:33 AM,  <darrinps@...> wrote:
>> Are there any plans to ship NetBeans with MySQL instead of JavaDB (which
>> I have had...well...a fair share of problems with over the last few
>> years) now that Sun is planning to buy MySQL?
>>
>> If not bundled, will it at least have better out of the box support (come
>> with the MySQL driver, etc.)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> David W. Van Couvering
> http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com
>
>

> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.6/1231 - Release Date: 1/18/2008
> 11:55 AM
>
>

[Wade Chandler]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

>Wade was right about what could then happen to the MySQL
>tree when there is one branch going off on the primary track
>and the other going off on the NetBeans track.

Well, in this case I didn't mean that NB would have a copy of the MySQL sources, but was just referencing the energy spent trying to include everything under the sun from just a maintenance and installation to support type of situation. We'll get questions about how to install MySQL, and when it doesn't work or what ever for what ever reason, when something is included with another product there is an expectation of some kind of support even if from the community. All things which get in the way of the IDE and the main goals of this project if you ask me. Developer Tool != RDBMS but tools for working with them I can better see, and even at that there are great tools with MySQL for the more advanced features of that database.

Wade

 

==================
Wade Chandler, CCE
Software Engineer and Developer, Certified Forensic Computer Examiner, NetBeans Dream Team Member, and NetBeans Board Member
http://www.certified-computer-examiner.com
http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/view/NetBeansDreamTeam
http://www.netbeans.org

[Na'Tosha Bard]

Greetings Everyone,

My personal opinion is that NetBeans doesn't need to bundle an entire database bundled with it.  I think good support for working with many databases should be the goal.  Bundling a database with NetBeans is only going to be helpful for the percentage of NetBeans users who 1) use databases (currently I work on a large, stand-alone, end-user spectroscopy application  that does not utilize a database of any kind), and 2) can and want to use whatever database is bundled with the IDE (at my last job when I was writing Java web applications, I didn't get to make choices about which databases were used.  Either our clients made that choice for us, or the applications that were already in development when I got their had their own databases already created).  If you're not in one of these two groups, having a bundled database with the IDE is just going to mean a more bloated download.

Just my $0.02.

Na'Tosha

On Jan 18, 2008 3:24 PM, David Van Couvering <david@...> wrote:

Holy schmoly!  Quite a lot of opinions here!  It's great to see so
much passion and interest in databases and NetBeans!  Full disclosure:
I'm the Sun employee currently responsible for core database tooling
in NetBeans (e.g. the Database Explorer and Java DB support).

I personally don't think it's a good idea to bundle MySQL with
NetBeans.   If you've noticed, we actually don't bundle Java DB.  We
do detect it if it's on your system, either the one that's bundled in
JDK 6 or the one bundled in Glassfish (which *is* bundled with the
enterprise version of NetBeans).

There are a lot of other interesting ideas out there.  You're not the
only one asking me what we should do here or providing opinions.  I've
had a very busy last few days :)

I hope to gather up all your ideas, put them into some kind of
reasonable form, and get your votes on what we should be doing.  So
please send your ideas my way.

First step; let's brainstorm on ideas.  Send them to me, and not just
nbusers, or I may miss them.  I'll add them to the Wiki.  Or you can
add them directly to the Wiki.

We'll go from there.  I think database tooling for NetBeans just got a
little kick in the pants :)

David

P.S. For more on this please see
http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com/2008/01/netbeans-and-mysql-what-to-do.html

On Jan 17, 2008 10:33 AM,  <darrinps@...> wrote:
> Are there any plans to ship NetBeans with MySQL instead of JavaDB (which I have had...well...a fair share of problems with over the last few years) now that Sun is planning to buy MySQL?
>
> If not bundled, will it at least have better out of the box support (come with the MySQL driver, etc.)?
>
>
>
>

--
David W. Van Couvering
http://davidvancouvering.blogspot.com