Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Mon, 2 May 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >>> > >>> Well, I think there's numerous examples where someone suggests some > >>> feature or idea, and Tom or one or two other core developers will > >>> say: "I don't like that idea", and then the proposer will more or > >>> less give up on it because it is clear that it won't go anywhere. > >> > >> Well I think that is more perception than anything. Sometimes you have > >> to fight for what you believe in. For example plPHP. I believe plPHP > >> belongs in core as do some other people. There are members of core > >> that are for it and against it. > >> > >> Command Prompt as the submitter needs to make a valid argument to sway > >> core. We need to present code they would be happy with. We need to > >> present reasons why. > > > > I think the plan for plphp is to put the source in our CVS, but to > > require it to be compiled as a separate 'make' step after php is fully > > installed and using the new libpq. I think we had agreement on that > > solution. > > Last I read, both Tom and I were against it being in CVS (albeit for > different reasons) ... and there hadn't been any discussions past the end > of that thread that I've seen ...
I posted this compromise and no one replied so I thought everyone was OK with it. It gets it into CVS, but has a separate compile stage to deal with the recursive dependency problem. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
