Re: might_have , has_many request

[prev] [thread] [next] [Date index for 2005/03/05]

From: Peter Speltz
Subject: Re: might_have , has_many request
Date: 01:45 on 05 Mar 2005
I'll check it out. Class::DBI is great as it is. Only things i miss is what i
mentioned in this post.  I didn't know extensive changes/additions were under
developement.  Have you thought about small patch releases with small patches
like HasMany patch and stuff that won't affect stability?

end transmission

--- Tony Bowden <tony-cdbitalk@xxxxx.xxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:51:38PM -0800, Peter Speltz wrote:
> > Ok thanks. Any idea when next CDBI release could be?
> 
> At the current rate, probably 2008.
> 
> I'd be happier releasing what's currently there if some people could
> try it out and assure me that the new half-implemented Attribute stuff
> doesn't break their existing applications in the most horrific manner.
> 
> I'm really not confident enough in it yet, but don't have the time to
> finish off the rest of it at the moment. About once every couple of
> months I get enough time to do some serious hacking on it, and push
> things forwards quite a bit, but that's mostly things that people here
> are throwing at me, rather than the stuff I want to do myself.
> 
> I've thrown up a new developer release at 
>   http://www.tmtm.com/CPAN/Class-DBI-0.96_59.tar.gz
> 
> I'm not really happy with it yet. As well as the Attribute stuff that
> worries me a little, I also need to sort out what's happening with SQLite
> and the test suite.  I switched the test suite to use SQLite2 for a while
> to cut out errors that I believe were caused by a bug in DBD::SQLite. I
> think that's fixed now and probably need to revert that.
> 
> I also probably want to back out the SearchGenerator stuff that's in the
> current version. It was another attempt to abstract this out that's
> mostly turned out to be a failure, just like my previous attempts.
> And the test suite currently uses
> 
> But if people can give it a test against some real code and tell me that
> it all works fine, I'll make a decision on those fairly quickly and get
> it out there.
> 
> That said, I don't see any real hurry to get out a new release. The
> current release has proved to be impressively stable, and there are enough
> hooks for people to have released plugins for lots of new functionality
> that might otherwise have needed to get past the bottleneck of me...
> 
> Tony
> 

pjs


	
		
__________________________________ 
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! 
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web 
http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/

(message missing)

might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 21:25 on 28 Feb 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Tony Bowden 22:08 on 28 Feb 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 22:42 on 28 Feb 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Cees Hek 22:43 on 28 Feb 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 23:24 on 28 Feb 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Tony Bowden 09:41 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 18:21 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Tony Bowden 19:05 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 19:27 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Tony Bowden 22:09 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 22:51 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Tony Bowden 23:39 on 01 Mar 2005

Re: might_have , has_many request
Peter Speltz 01:45 on 05 Mar 2005

Generated at 20:12 on 07 Mar 2005 by mariachi v0.52