On Tue, 2 Jul 2013 09:44:06 +0200, Jens Rehsack <rehs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the moment, I wouldn't spend to much brain on those cases, > as they do not affect any existing and targeted driver. > > Primary goal for the first shot are: > * DBI (and bundled drivers) > * SQL::Statement (with DBI::Mock extension) > * DBD::CSV * DBD::Pg PostgreSQL is now my primary target when I develop or test database related modules or scripts. It is a nice opponent to DBD::CSV. Pg is fast, complete and actively maintained, written from the database point-of-view using DBI. DBD::CSV is slow, incomplete (due to underlying restrictions) and written from the DBI point of view. The two have completely different routes from database to user, which is why these should make a neat couple. DBD::Pg *only* needs DBI, whereas DBD::CSV requires DBI, Text::CSV_XS, SQL::Statement, and DBD::File (in DBI) which implies more possible points of failure. > * DBD::SQLite > * DBD::Oracle > * DBD::DB2 > * DBD::Unify I have no plans to do serious work on that driver. We are moving away from that database which means that tuits will be hard to find to improved that one. DBD::Unify however took a basic approach in its initial test suite to just take the DBI docs and implement sequentially all the methods described by the time of writing, so the test suite was based on what DBI provides, not on what Unify offers. When tests failed, I wrote the corresponding DBD::Unify part or documented that that functionality would not work in Unify. So I have no objection if parts of those tests are copied or stolen from to complete the DBI::Test suite > * DBIx::Class # ribasushi has some dirty ideas … ask him ^^ > > o DBD::Sys > o DBD::AnyData (if any volunteer takes on it or I find a tuit) -- H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.19 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and openSUSE http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/ http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
