Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Databases Programming Software IT

Reports from the MySQL Users Conference 109

Posted by Zonk from the dolphin-party dept.
Eh-Wire writes "OnLamp is reporting on the MySQL Users Conference that is currently underway. Among the highlights are the announcement that the code for MySQL 5.0 is now complete. Axmark and Widenius suggest that squashing bugs is the key behind the success of MySQL. Michael Tiemann from Red Hat and the OSI delivered a keynote on "Defining Open Source". He suggests that Microsoft's "shared source license" has been a complete failure at the design level."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Reports from the MySQL Users Conference More

Reports from the MySQL Users Conference

Comments Filter:

  • MySQL's New Slogan (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:21PM (#12317824)
    "We're catchin' up!"

  • ...Reports from the MySQL Users Conference (Score:4, Funny)

    by waldoiverson ( 608278 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:21PM (#12317832) Homepage
    i don't think i've ever seen MySQL output a report like this...must have been a weird query.

  • Squashing Bugs Good? (Score:5, Funny)

    by mwkaufman ( 859791 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:22PM (#12317839)
    Who knew? Maybe Microsoft should follow this brilliant business plan.

  • Objection, redundant (Score:5, Funny)

    by Tackhead ( 54550 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:22PM (#12317851)
    > Microsoft's "shared source license" has been a complete failure at the design level.

    Due to the rising cost of energy, ink, and/or toner, we urge all authors to reduce their word count wherever possible. For instance, the string ('s "shared source license") in the preceding article is redundant and may be eliminated.

    Thank you for your co-operation.
    - The Management

  • From the Article (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DarkHelmet ( 120004 ) * <mark&seventhcycle,net> on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:24PM (#12317865) Homepage
    "MySQL 5.0 is code complete"

    So does this mean they're still doing bugfixes? Or they're doing testing? Or it's going to come out any moment?

    Or does it mean that they're no longer implementing new features, which means they're in beta. If that's the case, we knew that much already.

  • Mysql needs to Improve (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RedElf ( 249078 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:25PM (#12317877) Homepage
    It still has a long way to go, over the last weekend I spent several hours trying to recover data from a backup (mysqldump) because of dataloss due to mysql database corruption on server version 4.0.20.

    Sure it seems ok if you want to run a small, fast, dynamic website that doesn't contain any real valueable data.

    For serious data needs, in my projects I'll choose Sql-Server over mysql any day of every week. I'm not saying Sql-server is the best choice, but its ahead of mysql when it comes to data integrity.

    • Re:Mysql needs to Improve (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      tried postgresql?

    • Re:Mysql needs to Improve (Score:4, Informative)

      by eakerin ( 633954 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:32PM (#12317944) Homepage
      Data corruption has nothing to do with data integrity.

      Data corruption is caused by either a software bug, or hardware problems, and it's a problem with the data as it's layed out in the database's backing file. This type of failure can happen with any RDBMS. I've personally had it happen a few times with MSSQL server. All times were easily repaired with either a re-index of the table, or a partial table restore.

      Data integrity is the database ensuring that when you want to have an entry in another table for each row in a table, that you do.
      • data corruption can also be caused by lack of sufficient features.

        case in point, journaled vs. non-journaled filesystems, or the RDBMS equivalent which is write-ahead-logging (e.g., postgres).

      • Re:Mysql needs to Improve (Score:5, Informative)

        by TexVex ( 669445 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @06:31PM (#12318439)
        Data integrity is the database ensuring that when you want to have an entry in another table for each row in a table, that you do.
        That's referential integrity. For example, if your database enforces referential integrity between an accounts payable and a payable entities table, if you delete a payable entity then all associated payables records would be cascade-deleted along with it.

        And, as an aside, generally if you're going to maintain a record-for-record relationship between two tables, you might as well combine them into a single table.

        Data integrity is making sure your data is complete and accurate. The database can assist with this by the enforcement of rules when entering, deleting, and updating information. Extending the above example, you might preserve data integrity by disallowing deletion of a record from the payable entities table when there is a non-zero balance on that account or there has been activity on that account in the past three years.

      • Re:Mysql needs to Improve (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Michalson ( 638911 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @06:39PM (#12318508)
        Your perception of "data integrity" seems very limited, either that or you don't a thing and you're just bullshitting based on your knowledge of "data integrity" in other fields.

        In the professional world of databases data integrity is ensured by the ACID compliance of the database. In your post though you only seem to understand the C in ACID, "Consistency". The problem is that out of the box MySQL will often fail the Atomicity and Durability requirements of ACID (and doesn't even attempt I). That means the database or a table can be left in a corrupt, unrecoverable state if interrupted by any number of things (you don't just lose the latest additions, you lose everything, forcing you to restore from a hard backup as grandparent did).

        To properly understand this, look at another area where ACID is used. If you are using a disk formatted with FAT32 or ext2 and your computer crashes, you'll end up being forced to run scandisk/e2fsck, which has to go over the entire disk structure looking for errors. In many cases the errors it finds (due to an operation being interrupted leaving the disk in a corrupt state) are not recoverable and if left unchanged will mess things up even more. So you get little chunks of the disk (CHK files when using scandisk) that the system has no idea what to do with (databases are far more interconnected, making one unrecognizable element break the whole thing). On the other hand more modern disk systems (NTFS and ext3) borrow methods from the database world, resulting in a disk system that is ACID compliant. When the system crashes or is rebooted by a power failure, it doesn't spend 20 minutes checking the disk for errors it won't even be able properly fix, it just uses it's Durability feature to "instantly" restore the disk to the last good state (on a standard ext3 formatted 7200rpm drive "instantly" is less then 2 seconds).

        The only way to make MySQL ACID compliant (and thus durable enough to store information that's actually important) is to use InnoDB tables instead of MySQL's fast default MyISAM tables. Even then, by InnoDB's own documentation, its particular form of ACID compliance is heavily dependent on how and when the OS writes to disk - you can still end up with unrecoverable InnoDB tables if the system crashes, making InnoDB more a device for its transactional programming capabilities and row level locking then it's long term data integrity features (A, C and I). With real world databases a crash simply means you lose the latest changes, not the whole table (to be redundent, the D in ACID, Durability).
        • Do you mean where they write, about how even oracle looses data sometimes [mysql.com] But that you can always recover if you have a backup and your binary log?

          I've screwed up my DBs many times with my own stupid mistakes, and the backup and binary log have always come to the rescue and worked far faster than I expected. In general, if you loose one transaction and can't fix the table yourself, I'd say you should ask the expert in your environment for some help, or at least admit to your own shortcomings to your manag

          • Not be be a whiny grammer troll, but it's "lose".
            You wrote "loose" twice, so I assume it wasn't a casual mistake.
            You also wrote an otherwise complete an accurate paragraph, so I assume the correction is not something you'll dismiss...
            • G R A M M *A* R

              And it wasn't a grammar mistake, my dearest tosspot, it was a spelling mistake, aka, a TYPO.
              • Yeah, forgive me for trying to correct a guys usage of a word.
                Maybe I should have screamed, bitched, whined and pouted like you? Perhaps it's more effective?
                • Truly odd, thou art.

                  screamed, bitched, whined and pouted...

                  Really?

                  I do beg to differ.

                  It seems that in your opinion I was SHOUTING AT YOU by pointing out the TRUE IRONY of a post correcting someone's spelling itself containing a SPELLING MYSTACHE (!).

                  Rather than have a little laugh at your own silliness, you respond with a post containing another spelling/grammar error [missing Apostrophe of Possession], as well as mischaracterising my original post.

                  Tosspot, I say... thou art a tosspot!

                  C'est la vie.
                  • I give up. Apparently, you don't think your words had anything to do with whining, screaming, bitching and pouting, though I don't think you've looked at them lately.

                    So let us lay this out: Asking if a law exists to prevent people (who do not know everything) from trying to help others, correcting a spelling mistake by shouting in caps, correcting my chosen word followed by ridiculing, followed again by correcting my mischosen word.

                    Perhaps a little name calling and some shouting is normally how you correc

                    • moron (Score:2)

                      by Vryl ( 31994 )
                      A law, like Godwin's Law or thereabouts.

                      Humour is lost on you, you twit.

                      Try this:
                      http://www.advicemeant.com/flame/04psych.shtml#Sp e lling [advicemeant.com]

                      Though it is not quite what I had in mind. Something like "Spelling flames inevitably contain spelling mistakes" - Vryl's Law.

                      Btw, I never said you were wrong. Just a fuckwit for correcting someones spelling, when you can't spell yourself. It was funny.

                      Oddly enough, the loose/lose thing drives me mad too, but I have got used to it by now. Eventually, I suppose,
            • Thanks. That was the least whiny grammar troll I've known. Cheers.
        • Okay, so which GPL database passes this LSD test?

          And what's the I stand for?
          • I = Isolation
            Basically it means that when multiple users are performing operations on the database they should not be able to screw each other up (for example if two users execute an UPDATE on a table, they should not overlap and produce crazy results).

            To be technical MySQL does perform the basics of isolation - individual operations are properly isolated from one another by way of ugly full table locking (this is why MySQL [the default MyISAM tables] does so poorly at concurrent inserts and other write op
            • To be fair, you would have to include MySQL in that list since you cau use the InnoDB tables as well. Also, if you lock all the tables you are using with MyISAM tables you can get isolation... just not so nice for other users.
    • To sum up parent's comment:

      If you need high availability but not strong data integrity, choose MySQL.

      If you need strong data integrity but not high availability, choose MS SQL Server.

      • While people mark that as Funny. Most people/companies/mission-critical-places still choose Oracle over MS SQL and MySQL. I really would like to see MySQL 5.0 compete and actually topple oracle in the market place.

        • Re:Mysql needs to Improve (Score:4, Insightful)

          by bluGill ( 862 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @06:08PM (#12318279)

          If you are looking for an Oracle replacement try postgresql [postgresql.org]. Depending on what your needs are it might be better than Oracle, though if you needs are typical of what a business wants Oracle is likely better. Being open source (and more free than MySQL is, as the license is BSD) people do hack it to add weird things to their database.

          There are a number of open source databases. MySQL gets the press. That does not mean it is best for your purpose, so you really should examine them all yourself.

          Which is best is partially a matter of opinion. Mine is that between sqlite [sqlite.org] on the low end and postgresql on the high end there isn't much room for more general purpose SQL databases. Of course there are others, I'm not going to list them all because I'll forget at least one if I try.

        • If you want to replace Oracle, another post recommended Postgres, I am recommending Ingres [ca.com]. Ingres and Postgres come from similar lineage except Ingres was comercial, built up to be extremely robust and for many years was Oracle's biggest competition and even today still has more databases deployed then all open source databases together (or so claimed one review I read while researching database alternatives myself). Once CA bought Ingres, development slowed down greatly after 1994, however a decade later
      • i think you meant to say "performance" not "availablity"...

        and fwiw mysql is only high performance in read-mostly non-transactional environments.
      • If you need high availability but not strong data integrity, choose MySQL.

        If you need strong data integrity but not high availability, choose MS SQL Server.

        And if you need both, choose Oracle or Postgresql, depending on whether low price or enterprise-grade support is more important to you.

  • well.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by quark007 ( 765762 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:25PM (#12317882) Journal
    >> He suggests that Microsoft's "shared source license" has been a complete failure at the design level." I agree with what Tiemann says..but to an extent. MySql an JBOSS are now commercial companies who employ team of developers to develop the code much like a proprietory software. The real value in open source is the amount of feedback you get from the developers which in turn improves the quality. Microsoft with its license is trying to just that. And it would succeed..(just like JBoss and MySql have).
  • MySQL 5.0, now with 3 full revisions more than MySQL 2.0

  • MySql 5.1 (Score:3, Funny)

    by 514CK3R ( 875865 ) <root@boredd[ ]lopers.com ['eve' in gap]> on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:29PM (#12317919)
    Among the highlights are the announcement that the code for MySQL 5.0 is now complete.
    So that means we should expect 5.1 to come out next week as planned?
  • ...after all, the recent PostgreSQL 8.0.2 release included a cache management algorithm replacement [postgresql.org] due to a patent.
  • It's great that bugs are fixed, but how about investing more in user education, so that people at least realize that they could have every patch imaginable installed but still be owned by SQL injection, a problem with whoever wrote their webpage or app that interfaces with the SQL server and not the SQL server it self.

    MySQL is a lot better about it then MSSQL due to the lack of comments, but disastrous things can still be done with this.

    For those that are curious, more info on SQL injection can be found h [spidynamics.com]
    • That's not a database problem, but an application problem.

      In the Windows world you can do this with ADO, for instance. Simply make EVERYTHING go through a stored procedure, then call it always creating a Command object. For example, in VB:

      Dim cmd As New ADODB.Command
      With cmd
      Set .ActiveConnection = ServerConnection .CommandText = "do_stuff"
      With .Parameters .Append cmd.CreateParameter("foo", adVarChar, adParamInput, 100, Foo) .Append cmd.CreateParameter("bar", adVarChar, adParamInput, 100, Bar)
      E
    • As my siblings and cousins have said, this has nothing to do with MySQL at all. It's a problem with every DB. People primarily associate this with MySQL because of inexperienced PHP/MySQL scripters. It's the difference between:

      // using an already established mysql resource with mysql_connect...
      mysql_query("UPDATE users SET password = '$pw' WHERE user_id = $user_id");

      vs:

      // using PEAR DB with an already established $dbh handle...
      $dbh->query("UPDATE users SET password = ? WHERE user_id = ?", array($pw, $

  • People give MySQL too much crap... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:51PM (#12318117)
    Really, it sort of annoys me. We use MySQL in a live, production environment. We have tables with close to five billion rows in them. MySQL has only given us a problem once. A table was mysteriously corrupted about two years ago. The fix? I opened up a HEX editor and repaired the damage. Restarted MySQL, ran some checks with the included tools, and we were all done. Quicker than pulling tapes, let me tell you.

    I am really tired of all the hate around here. Every other comment is "If you're serious you will use Postgres because it has feature x, y, and z which make it a better product and you will suffer the consequences if you use MySQL because it's a bad thing for bad people because they don't like penguins and hot grits and bacon shit!"

    Actually, it's not that bad... but it's damn near.
    • You think hacking a table with a hex editor is good?

      Think I'll stick with known good backups , glad I'm not working with your prod environment.

    • Re:People give MySQL too much crap... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by vadim_t ( 324782 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @06:05PM (#12318241) Homepage
      Well, it might just be me, but I definitely don't look forward to hex editing databases when the thing goes down and the whole company grinds to a halt.

      Now, I will readily say that mySQL has its uses. If you're simply aiming to logging data it works well. IIRC, that's what it was designed for in the beginning.

      But it's still quite far from being a good database. Doing crap like silently ignoring things it doesn't like is one of the things that makes sure I'll never use it for anything important.

    • Re:People give MySQL too much crap... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 22, 2005 @06:06PM (#12318255)
      When the number of items on the "gotchas" list for MySQL (http://sql-info.de/mysql/gotchas.html) is less than or equal to the same list for PostgreSQL (http://sql-info.de/postgresql/postgres-gotchas.ht ml) I'll consider using MySQL.

      • You evaluate software based on two lists posted on a web site? If the author had started the PostgreSQL gotchas page first (the one prominently marked "still under progress"), would you post the same comment with the database names reversed?

        • Um, look well at both pages.

          PostgreSQL gotchas are a lot less severe. Most of them result in errors. Some result in bad performance. Only two (date parsing and integer overflow) produce unexpected behavior. Both were fixed.

          MySQL gotchas mostly deal with things the database flatly ignores when they don't fit, resulting sometimes in completely wrong information inserted into the database. I don't know about you, but if I say the column is NOT NULL, I definitely expect the attempts to insert a NULL there to
      • Most of the gotchas are non-existant when you run MySQL in STRICT or TRADITIONAL compliance mode (this is new with 5.0)
        • Most of the gotchas are non-existant when you run MySQL with a brain larger than that of a legume in your head as well.

          Most of the problems pointed out should never hit the database engine and if they do, you get what you deserve.

          I've worked at more than a few multi-nationals and if queries ever hit the database engine that generated errors or inconsistancies, you'd be back, hard at work, rewriting your interface (be it Cobol or PowerHouse, or C)

          We had worse problems trying to migrate to SAP at Nortel o

          • Most of the problems pointed out should never hit the database engine and if they do, you get what you deserve.

            Of course they shouldn't hit the database engine. When they do, however, I'd like to know about it rather than have the database engine silently determine the semantics of something that's supposed to be undefined.

            It sounds as if MySQL 5 has dealt with a large amount of this criticism, now, which is good.

          • Most of the problems pointed out should never hit the database engine and if they do, you get what you deserve.

            That is the typical "It's always the application's fault instead of MySql's fault for not properly enforcing rules to guarantee consistency of data" response I've come to expect from the hoardes of MySql apologists.

          • Re:People give MySQL too much crap... (Score:4, Insightful)

            by snorklewacker ( 836663 ) on Saturday April 23, 2005 @12:15AM (#12320492)
            > Most of the gotchas are non-existant when you run MySQL with a brain larger than that of a legume in your head as well.

            This is the same tired old argument old-style MacOS zealots always pulled when called on the lack of memory protection: "properly written apps don't crash".

            The whole fucking PURPOSE of integrity constraints is to protect your data from stupid mistakes. Databases are designed with improperly written apps in mind. That's why the database manages the data, and the apps don't.

            Yes, if a schema is designed by morons, then you don't have much recourse. If a database ENGINE is designed by morons, then everyone downstream is screwed.

          • Most of the problems pointed out should never hit the database engine and if they do, you get what you deserve.

            What if you're programming application A, and application B has a bug and issues a strange query, producing inconsistent results? Application A will mysteriously fail and it will be very difficult to track down the bug because it's not in your application. Is that what you deserve?

            The "application's fault" paradigm of MySQL only makes sense when a single application is accessing the database. An

    • Re:People give MySQL too much crap... (Score:4, Informative)

      by snorklewacker ( 836663 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @07:19PM (#12318885)
      Dude, MySQL doesn't support foreign keys. At all. Though it's good at ignoring them. It doesn't even have VIEWS, mmkay?

      There's reasons for the hate, and a lot of it has to do with MySQL AB flogging their mediocre system as the sine qua non of OSS databases, to the point of openly disparaging things like transactions at the time when MySQL didn't support those.

      And you thought using a hex editor was acceptable. Wow.
      • myisam doesn't support foreign keys. innodb, which has been included in the binary distribution for the past few years, does. yes, you have to explicitly say the table should be innodb, which isn't really a major issue.

        • Re:People give MySQL too much crap... (Score:2, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          yes, you have to explicitly say the table should be innodb, which isn't really a major issue.

          Actually, yes, it is a major issue. If you ask for an innodb table, and for some reason it's not available (e.g. innodb isn't compiled in, common in hosting environments), then MySQL will go ahead and create a myisam table without warning you. The result? Your foreign keys, which "work just fine" under MySQL, are simply ignored.

    • A table was mysteriously corrupted about two years ago. The fix? I opened up a HEX editor and repaired the damage.

      Oh, is that all it took? A knowledge of precisely which data had been corrupted, and enough familiarity with the internals of the data file format to find and correct it without breaking anything else?

      I'm glad it worked out for you. That time.

  • Unfortunately for me, though I know that the real database is the engine that does the work, my appreciation of a database only comes when I can in very specific and short iterations, install one just like I used to install JET with the access frontend. In fact most people refer to the Access frontend as the database forgetting that the database is JET. Question is: When will MySQL slap a functional (read programmable) front end to MySQL?

    I know there are many frontends available (KEXI, PHPMYADMIN, SQLNAVI

    • Excuse me for saying this but cobblers.

      Access == Desktop solution
      MySQL != Desktop solution

      MySQL is designed to act as a database server and reside away from the client(s) accessing data contained in MySQL. Access is really designed for desktop database solutions and not enterprise grade databases.

      Apart from that MySQL + ODBC Drivers gives you the ability if you feal the need to use access/vba etc as a front end into a MySQL database.
      (Though given you've got API's for MySQL available for C,C++,Perl,PHP,
      • Have you ever tried using myODBC? The current iteration is completely worthless. It has all kinds of compatibility problems and behaves unpredictably. Date/Time compatibility with Access is probably the worst.

        I'm no professional, but I'm not entirely inexperienced in these systems. After a week of knocking around on mySQL with an Access front-end, I had to give up and go with MSDE. I'll upgrade to SQL Server once the system's important enough that I don't have justify the cost.

        • with MSDE. I'll upgrade to SQL Server once the system's important enough that I don't have justify the cost

          MSDE is one of the best things MS ever did to help keep its lead in this area. Its a good, strong database engine with minimal licensing issues and total upwards compatability with their bigger tools.

          It also kicks MySQL's butt feature wise= for desktop development.
        • Hm, I'm using the ODBC driver at work to interact with MySQL (Actually to a bugzilla database) for reporting and some custom metrics we need with no problems. Same for the Access tables we use when we need to send copies of our Bugzilla data to our subcontractors.

          Then again I'm not really taxing the interactions and so may have missed some the bugs :)
    • I know it sucks. Seriously, when will every database ventor create a seprate product that was made for something completely different to act as a front end to a database? How can a database admin be expected to use SQL, or an application developer be expected to create an application to access and use the data.
    • You shouldn't compare MySQL to M$ Access because Access isn't a client-server database. It's a desktop database for work with other desktop/office applications and the closest comparison is the new Java datbase which comes with OpenOffice 2. MySQL should be compared with M$ SQL Server, though it has less features at present, because both are distributed, client-server architectures.
      • MySQL should be compared with M$ SQL Server, though it has less features at present, because both are distributed, client-server architectures. Precisely. SQL Server comes with the Enterprise Manager GUI, MySQL comes with no GUI.
        • It comes with two GUIs. Go look at their download page.

          I prefer sqlyog myself. There is a great free version and a better paid version. I like it much better then the enterprise manager/query analyzer combo from MS. Of course I don't care much for SQL server either but that's another story.

  • currently underway, eh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by donutz ( 195717 ) on Friday April 22, 2005 @05:55PM (#12318152) Homepage Journal
    "OnLamp is reporting on the MySQL Users Conference that is currently underway."

    But the conference website [mysqluc.com] says it finished yesterday...
  • Not to be nitpicky... but "currently underway"? I live in Sunnyvale, and that's where a number of my coworkers have been all week. However, it was over yesterday!

  • God likes Oracle! (Score:4, Funny)

    by EvilStein ( 414640 ) <.ten.pbp. .ta. .maps.> on Friday April 22, 2005 @06:54PM (#12318670)
    The weather here has been *beautiful* for a while. Today, during the MySQL Users Conference right down the street, we basically get the following:

    SPECIAL WEATHER STATEMENT
    NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE SAN FRANCISCO CA
    344 PM PDT FRI APR 22 2005

    CAZ005>008-065-075-230000-
    -SANTA CLARA COUNTY-
    344 PM PDT FRI APR 22 2005

    STRONG THUNDERSTORMS HAVE DEVELOPED OVER THE EAST BAY THIS
    AFTERNOON.. EXPECT
    STRONG GUSTY WINDS TO 40 MPH...FREQUENT LIGHTNING AND SMALL HAIL WITH THESE STORMS.

    ---

    I'm telling you, the almighty one himself has made his database choice, and it ain't MySQL!

  • Two words (Score:2, Funny)

    by Obstin8 ( 827030 )
    Post Gres. Gracias Oops, that was three. Sorry...

  • From the article:

    [Tiemann] next cited Bruce Mau's work, "Massive Change,"
    saying that for most of us design is invisible until it fails.

    From Bruce Mau's An Incomplete Manifesto for Growth [brucemaudesign.com]:

    24. Avoid software. The problem with software is that everyone has it.

    Bruce Mau must be a really clever designer to get his web site to function without software.

  • Readers may be interested in the MySQL User Conference 2005 Blog aggregation.

    It is found at http://www.openwin.org/mike/uc2005 [openwin.org]

    There are about 10 blogs aggregated and an average of 10 posts a day from the conference. Not much, but it lets your get the coles notes version of a bunch of sessions.

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Close