Re: My patches, complete

[prev] [thread] [next] [Date index for 2004/08/08]

On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 08:52:22PM +0300, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> The reason I'm opposed is because there's two CDBI loaders, there's
> Class::DBI::Join, and so on and so forth,=20

Yes. That's a good thing. The more the merrier. I'd rather have fewer
things in the core than more.

> That's assuming sometime in the long term future it will make CDBI
> core. I base this assumption on your remarks the last time I brought
> it up, about namespace, meta info, and so forth.

Something like it almost probably will. Supporting Many-Many is To Be
Done. Whether it's this, I don't know, as I haven't had a chance to
really look at it yet and think about it.

> If there is a chance that it will make core, I would much rather
> ease the QA process. Some sort of live (instant message kind of
> live) session to go over it, with someone who has authority over the
> code base, cleaning up my coding style, adding more comments, or
> simply restructuring some stuff will be (IMHO) much more productive
> than cluttering the CPAN.

I'm certainly open to doing this, but not any time soon.

> Again, it's not a complex module. It's just syntatic sugar, that
> might provide a nice interface, and probably a consistent one
> (perhaps this is the one reason that it should be core at all), to
> real or fake many to many relationship, regardless of future
> implementation details.

Throw it on CPAN and see what feedback you get from users. That way
we'll know how useful it is and what the issues are before comitting it
to core.

Tony