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 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 likely, leave it out".
[Gah. I'm talking gibberish.] > > I suggest releasing DBI *without* the pollute stuff and let the drivers > > catch > > up. The drivers would still work with Perls before 5.13 without changes. > > In > > particular, it will make it much easier to test that drivers are correct if > > DBI > > isn't muddling things up by perpetuating the pollution. -- Darren Duncan > > Though I mentally support this stand, I'm a bit worried about DBD's > that do not have active maintainers and will suddenly fail when DBI is > upgraded and there will be noone available for a quick fix. I agree. It's inappropriate for me to risk potential failures of drivers due to a change in the DBI that isn't really needed. Any breakage would affect users of all versions of perl, not just those trying 5.14. I'm just flagging an issue that'll affect users of 5.14 in the hope of minimizing the damage when it does. I think that's worked quite well. At the moment I believe DBD::Oracle and DBD::Informix have the problem. I hope their maintainers have a new release out soon. Tim.
