Re: [CDBI] Class::DBI maintainer/userbase issues?

>=20

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--===============1909343344==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="------------enig82C10EB50B5DD8C3DE27EE5F"

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig82C10EB50B5DD8C3DE27EE5F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Peter Leonard wrote:
>=20
> Hi All,
>=20
> So I've dabbled with Class::DBI on past projects, and I'm planning on
> using it with a new project that I'm putting together here.  While doin=
g
> some additional homework, I came across the Class::DBI::Frozen::301
> package on CPAN, started reading, and started getting nervous.  I've
> spent a bunch of time on the wiki, and on the mailing lists, but the
> split hinted at in the above module was news to me.
>=20
> My question is this (and I'm hoping to not start a flamewar here):
>=20
> What's the deal?  What's the current situation with Class::DBI
> development and the user/developer-base?  If you were about to embark o=
n
> a large, brand-new project, would you base it on the latest Class::DBI
> (currently 3.0.14), or stay with 3.01?  Is there a reason for concern
> here?  (Noting that in the past, rapidly-revised packages have been a
> major pain - thinking about Class::MethodMaker between v1 and v2.)
>=20
> Apologies if I'm picking at a sore spot,
>=20
>     --pete

All flame wars aside, 3.0.1 is a frozen version of 0.96. CDBI has
undergone many improvements since 0.96, and some that cause issues for
programs that were never expecting to work above 0.96.

Personally, I use CDBI in Handel and tested it across all versions
without much if a problem. CDBI works well for me but I'm not doing much
  hocus pocus. For others who do more adventurous things with ORDM type
things, CDBI may be causing them grief. It really is a
it-works-for-you-or-it-doesn't kind of thing.

CDBI isn't the only toy in the box so to speak. If you're still
reasearching, also take a look at DBIx::Class and also the Rose stuff on
CPAN. Each has their pros and cons depending on your situation.

-=3DChris

--------------enig82C10EB50B5DD8C3DE27EE5F
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFEA0zv+66dLHM50ssRAjRSAKCYbSoyRJfXZ7bACgvLRDwAZcNSDgCeKH9z
+RTWm6cIQfSr2GY0p4D66H0=
=MbRE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enig82C10EB50B5DD8C3DE27EE5F--

--===============1909343344==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
ClassDBI mailing list
ClassDBI@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx
http://lists.digitalcraftsmen.net/mailman/listinfo/classdbi

--===============1909343344==--