The fact support is still light is all the more reason to get optional support out there in wide distribution, so more than just this mailing list have a chance to test it thoroughly.
At the moment, we're holding up this testing to just the people willing to play with potentially unstable releases. As for why have a prod release, because of all the other fixes and changes we've got bundled up. We finally pass our test suite completely everywhere, so far as I can tell from CPAN Testers. I really want that out there. Adam K 2009/11/3 Kenichi Ishigaki <kishig...@gmail.com>: > Then let's wait for another month and another sqlite release. > Releasing just before this Christmas would make more sense. > In the end, the current sqlite is the first version with > foreign keys support. They are doing pubic tests right now, > and we haven't seen, and will see the result probably in a > month or so. Why do we need to rush out our stable release? > > As I wrote in the previous mail, we need more tests. As of > this writing, we have virtually no tests for foreign keys > and virtual tables they use. > > Besides, we have #48600 that reported several downstream > distributions were revealed broken by our more strict > error handling, which I haven't checked fully but it looks > like they still have issues like this: > > http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=50591 > > Probably we should let people know that sqlite has been > supporting "IF (NOT) EXISTS" for some (or a long?) time, > and they can fix these issue with that clause right now, > even before our next stable release. A few nights ago, > DBIC people also found this issue, and they said maybe > their issue can be fixed in DBIC. It's better to give > people more time to test. > > I think removing the on-by-default bit doesn't help, > especially if it's to release early. It will eventually > be turned on. And most probably they know how to cope with > it when it's enabled. As foreign keys have long been ignored, > if they are already there, they are for other engines people > are using in other places. > > > Kenichi > > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 11:03:09 +1100, Adam Kennedy <adamkennedybac...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>For the first production release of DBD::SQLite with foreign keys, >>it's starting to make me nervous that we will enable it by default. >> >>As things currently stand, nobody that is using SQLite has ever seen >>this feature before. They haven't had the chance to work with it at >>all before we shove it down their throats. >> >>I think I'd like to follow SQLite itself for now and default it off. >> >>Thoughts? >> >>Adam K >> >>_______________________________________________ >>DBD-SQLite mailing list >>DBD-SQLite@lists.scsys.co.uk >>http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbd-sqlite > > > _______________________________________________ > DBD-SQLite mailing list > DBD-SQLite@lists.scsys.co.uk > http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbd-sqlite > _______________________________________________ DBD-SQLite mailing list DBD-SQLite@lists.scsys.co.uk http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbd-sqlite