On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:55:42AM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote: > Whereas, if I am wrong and the primary reason against releasing your > existing work isn't about the risk of breaking things for users, > then I don't understand why the future DBIC governance has any > bearing on what you can do right now.
Right now, I still consider riba to be chainsaw delegate on technical matters, and he has every right to complete and ship this work if he believes that to be the best thing for the code and user base. > Regardless, I agree with what you said in "1/5 What is stability" The thing is ... mostly, so do I, and in general, over the years, the vast majority of stability arguments that he and I have been involved in have been ones where both of us have been on the same side - fighting for more attention to be paid to stability than people seemed to be intending to - and it's been really nice to have the company. The examples given of my being against stability are, well, the most visible times we've disagreed. But at least up until a couple of years ago, my memory says we've been on the same side a lot more often than not. Where we diverge is where you get to - https://twitter.com/ribasushi/status/727539149822132224 'There is "general FOSS" and there is "platform FOSS" In face of uncertainty In the latter case the imperative is to do nothing' which I agree is a good *default*, but not always universally correct. Some times something is a big enough leap forwards that it justifies taking the risk of shipping it and having to clean up a few small fires that ensue as a result. To pick an example dear to my heart, we went through six dev releases before shipping 0.05 (and had enough people using DBIC against their production database that I was already moderately paranoid), but then still had to do a couple of releases very quickly afterwards to fix bugs people found. On the other hand, that release is when ResultSet acquired a search() method and became chainable. So, basically: from where I'm standing I hold 90% of riba's stance to be self evident, but prefer to be utilitarian rather than dogmatic about the remaining cases. I'd hope that the combination of a core team and a public decision making process that consults the userbase about priorities will be sufficient to ensure that if people thinking I'm weighting said utility function wrongly, I'll find out before applying the results. -- Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/ http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/ Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our CPAN commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team. _______________________________________________ List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/ Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
