<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should WP drop MySQL 3.23 support?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:22:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: toys</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26824</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[toys]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 20:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26824</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I definitely agree with many of the other guys here – since it is redundant, drop support for it. It doesn&#039;t make sense to continue. Since MySQL AB are dropping support for their product, I don&#039;t think Wordpress ought to take on the responsibility of support.

Kudo&#039;s to you guys for keeping support for so long – that&#039;s truly commendable. But I think in this case, you should not worry to much. You should upgrade to receive proper support. This isn&#039;t a windows XP to windows Vista issue... lol.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I definitely agree with many of the other guys here – since it is redundant, drop support for it. It doesn&#8217;t make sense to continue. Since MySQL AB are dropping support for their product, I don&#8217;t think WordPress ought to take on the responsibility of support.</p>
<p>Kudo&#8217;s to you guys for keeping support for so long – that&#8217;s truly commendable. But I think in this case, you should not worry to much. You should upgrade to receive proper support. This isn&#8217;t a windows XP to windows Vista issue&#8230; lol.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Diario a Borbo &#183; WordPress 2.1 RC 1</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26823</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Diario a Borbo &#183; WordPress 2.1 RC 1]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2007 07:24:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26823</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] se ha abierto un debate/discusión sobre si se debería dar soporte a la versiones 3.23.23 o superior de MySQL en WordPress 2.1 y parece ser que ya han tomado una decisión como cuentan en SigT. Estos requeremientos de MySQL no [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] se ha abierto un debate/discusión sobre si se debería dar soporte a la versiones 3.23.23 o superior de MySQL en WordPress 2.1 y parece ser que ya han tomado una decisión como cuentan en SigT. Estos requeremientos de MySQL no [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: +++ Wordpress Ticker +++ &#8212; Software Guide</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26817</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[+++ Wordpress Ticker +++ &#8212; Software Guide]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 23:58:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26817</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] ergeben, dass die wenigsten für den Weitererhalt dieser veralteten MySQL-Version stimmten, daher wurde entschieden, dass für Wordpress 2.1 MySQL 4.0 oder höher erforderlich ist. Mit Wordpress 2.2 werden nur noch [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] ergeben, dass die wenigsten für den Weitererhalt dieser veralteten MySQL-Version stimmten, daher wurde entschieden, dass für WordPress 2.1 MySQL 4.0 oder höher erforderlich ist. Mit WordPress 2.2 werden nur noch [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26821</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ryan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:21:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26821</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[2.1 doesn&#039;t use MATCH AGAINST.  Perhaps a plugin is doing that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>2.1 doesn&#8217;t use MATCH AGAINST.  Perhaps a plugin is doing that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kris</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26820</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kris]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 20:08:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26820</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[wp 2.1 doesn&#039;t currently work with mysql 4 either, it uses mysql 5 only &quot;match&quot; &quot;against&quot; syntax.  it could easily be changed to not use mysql 5 only syntax and work with 4 as well though.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wp 2.1 doesn&#8217;t currently work with mysql 4 either, it uses mysql 5 only &#8220;match&#8221; &#8220;against&#8221; syntax.  it could easily be changed to not use mysql 5 only syntax and work with 4 as well though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: moeffju</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26822</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[moeffju]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 13:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Drop 3.x support, the moreso as the 2.0.x series will keep running on 3.x.

Most hosters offer the choice between 4.x and 5.x nowadays, I don&#039;t know anyone still using MySQL 3.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Drop 3.x support, the moreso as the 2.0.x series will keep running on 3.x.</p>
<p>Most hosters offer the choice between 4.x and 5.x nowadays, I don&#8217;t know anyone still using MySQL 3.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pumpkinslayer</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26816</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pumpkinslayer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 04:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26816</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Drop it!

Wordpress has always maintained security updates of previous versions, so users would in no way have a compromised/unsecure version. If you want the latest release though, you&#039;ll need 4.x or higher.

Keep moving forward...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Drop it!</p>
<p>WordPress has always maintained security updates of previous versions, so users would in no way have a compromised/unsecure version. If you want the latest release though, you&#8217;ll need 4.x or higher.</p>
<p>Keep moving forward&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Claude Gelinas</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26815</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Claude Gelinas]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Dec 2006 04:59:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26815</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As long as there&#039;s a comprehensive upgrade path, for WordPress, from MySQL 3.x to 4.x, it&#039;s a good choice to move up to 4.x, especially if there are performance advantages.

Bloggers who happen to use MySQL 3.x as their backend database can continue doing so for as long as they want... until they want to use the latest and greatest feature that&#039;ll be developed for use with MySQL 4.x.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As long as there&#8217;s a comprehensive upgrade path, for WordPress, from MySQL 3.x to 4.x, it&#8217;s a good choice to move up to 4.x, especially if there are performance advantages.</p>
<p>Bloggers who happen to use MySQL 3.x as their backend database can continue doing so for as long as they want&#8230; until they want to use the latest and greatest feature that&#8217;ll be developed for use with MySQL 4.x.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bliss</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26819</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bliss]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26819</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yups. Drop It!. Once its dropped, those never bothering upgrading it will &#039;wake up&#039; a bit with &#039;yawn&#039; n upgrade it.

no harms.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yups. Drop It!. Once its dropped, those never bothering upgrading it will &#8216;wake up&#8217; a bit with &#8216;yawn&#8217; n upgrade it.</p>
<p>no harms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Roysdon</title>
		<link>http://ryan.boren.me/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26818</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Roysdon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2006 23:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boren.nu/archives/2006/11/19/should-wp-drop-mysql-323-support/#comment-26818</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m running RH&#039;s Fedora Core 3 still:
$ rpm -q mysql
mysql-3.23.58-16.FC3.1

We are planning to upgrade to FC6 shortly which has mysql.i386 5.0.27-1.fc6.

However, upgrades are slow and painful.  They take a lot of work and consideration.  We don&#039;t just want to drop in a custom mysql RPM, as we need security updates, but we don&#039;t manage that ourselves.  That means we take a huge step forward when we move to FC6 and not just mysql is going to be affected.

FC3 is still supported by fedoralegacy.org until FC7-Test1 ships (another month or so at least).  Even Fedora has release maintenance/support cycles, and I think it&#039;s totally acceptable for WP to do the same.  Just give us all enough warning, and keep maintaining the WP2.0.x cycle for security patches (no new features) once WP2.1 ships to give those some more of us time.

Webpages and blogging is a hobby for me, and not something I have a lot of time to devote on the backend to.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m running RH&#8217;s Fedora Core 3 still:<br />
$ rpm -q mysql<br />
mysql-3.23.58-16.FC3.1</p>
<p>We are planning to upgrade to FC6 shortly which has mysql.i386 5.0.27-1.fc6.</p>
<p>However, upgrades are slow and painful.  They take a lot of work and consideration.  We don&#8217;t just want to drop in a custom mysql RPM, as we need security updates, but we don&#8217;t manage that ourselves.  That means we take a huge step forward when we move to FC6 and not just mysql is going to be affected.</p>
<p>FC3 is still supported by fedoralegacy.org until FC7-Test1 ships (another month or so at least).  Even Fedora has release maintenance/support cycles, and I think it&#8217;s totally acceptable for WP to do the same.  Just give us all enough warning, and keep maintaining the WP2.0.x cycle for security patches (no new features) once WP2.1 ships to give those some more of us time.</p>
<p>Webpages and blogging is a hobby for me, and not something I have a lot of time to devote on the backend to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

