Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-09-01 Thread H.Merijn Brand
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 21:07:46 -0700, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: Tim Bunce wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:55:32AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Aug 31, 2010, at 2:52 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: It's back in. I may remove it for 1.615 or, more likely, may leave it out

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-09-01 Thread Jens Rehsack
2010/9/1 H.Merijn Brand h.m.br...@xs4all.nl: On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 21:07:46 -0700, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: Tim Bunce wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:55:32AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Aug 31, 2010, at 2:52 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: It's back in. I may remove it

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-09-01 Thread Tim Bunce
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 08:56:22AM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote: On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 21:07:46 -0700, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: Tim Bunce wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:55:32AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Aug 31, 2010, at 2:52 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: It's

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-31 Thread Tim Bunce
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 02:15:32PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote: Tim Bunce wrote: What's the state of play? Will DBI 1.614 still lack the POLLUTE or did you put that back in? -- Darren Duncan It's back in. I may remove it for 1.615 or, more likely, may leave it out and individual developers

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-31 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 31, 2010, at 2:52 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: It's back in. I may remove it for 1.615 or, more likely, may leave it out and individual developers deal with failure reports on perl 5.13.3+/5.14. You may “remove it…or, more likely, leave it out”? Huh? David

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-31 Thread David E. Wheeler
On Aug 31, 2010, at 1:08 PM, Tim Bunce wrote: It's back in. I may remove it for 1.615 or, more likely, may leave it out and individual developers deal with failure reports on perl 5.13.3+/5.14. You may “remove it…or, more likely, leave it out”? Huh? Ug. I meant may restore it or, more

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-31 Thread Darren Duncan
Tim Bunce wrote: On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:55:32AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote: On Aug 31, 2010, at 2:52 AM, Tim Bunce wrote: It's back in. I may remove it for 1.615 or, more likely, may leave it out and individual developers deal with failure reports on perl 5.13.3+/5.14. You may “remove

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-30 Thread Jens Rehsack
2010/8/30 Tim Bunce tim.bu...@pobox.com: What's the state of play? Beside the failing test on Win32 which needs a detailed view, not really. I'd like to use dbd_edit_mm_attribs for reworked tests in SQL::Statement (but I'm not near to the finish line, so maybe 1.615 could be ready then ^^) and

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-30 Thread Darren Duncan
Tim Bunce wrote: What's the state of play? Will DBI 1.614 still lack the POLLUTE or did you put that back in? -- Darren Duncan

Re: Any reasons not to release DBI 1.614?

2010-08-30 Thread H.Merijn Brand
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 22:40:52 +0200, H.Merijn Brand h.m.br...@xs4all.nl wrote: What's the state of play? Jens has to make t/50dbm_simple.t more defensive Done and passed. 1.163_92 is up and available Thank you Tim for the speedy action -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger