On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 18:27:03 +0100, Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+d...@rabbit.us> wrote:

On 10/07/2016 08:40 PM, David Golden wrote:

[...] I have grave reservations about the specific (now) 4-member team
outlined by Matt. The reservations are entirely technical and procedural
in nature [...] I will elaborate on these reservations if necessary

As above, I think hearing your reservations and the rationale behind
them would be valuable input.  It's clear from the comments from the
community so far that stability (however defined) is important to many.
Your thoughts on what would and wouldn't work will help shape the
discussion of future governance.

- ilmari: Decidedly another "ehthusiast". Great at proposing and implementing low-hanging-fruit fixups. Yet loses interest whenever the problem space required a more in-depth solution.

- castaway: Openly decries DBIC[8] for being unlike "... other
bits of CPAN, apart from maybe the ones in core, that attempt to be as
rigorous in their perfection"

- frew: True, the only person in the entire thread so far to echo my understanding of "stability"[9]. Has a very mature approach to software engineering, and while having "enthusiast" leanings as well is able to recognize when it is time to put his tools down. On the down-side: has (understandably) no patience for pesky squabbles, and has expressed unambiguously his involvement won't be "what it used to be"[10]

.. If anyone wonders why I've been quiet, this may help explain it... This is difficult to reply to, so this is as much as you're going to get.


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

Reply via email to