-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
I believe that DBI should go away as an actual piece of code and instead be
replaced by an API specification document, taking PSGI as inspiration.
I'm having a hard time envisioning how this would work in practice. What I
see is lots of
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
I believe that DBI should go away as an actual piece of code and instead be
replaced by an API specification document, taking PSGI as inspiration.
I'm having a hard time envisioning how this would work in practice. What I
see is lots of duplicated code across the
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Darren Duncan
As for DBMS-specific hacks
Another possible approach would be a strict interface that only allows
some kind of DBI creole -- well, I suppose a lot of other
persistence frameworks are that, pretty much.
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:23:02 -0700, Darren Duncan
dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote:
Fundamentally I propose an inversion of control, where users invoke DBD
modules
directly that optionally invoke or compose DBI to help them, rather than
users
invoking DBI that uses DBD modules to help it.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 2:07 AM, H.Merijn Brand h.m.br...@xs4all.nl wrote:
The fact that the DBI is restrictive (or restricted) is a good thing.
First of all most of the restrictions are based on well thoughtthrough
decisions based on speed and use of resources. I do not have to take
those
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 01:13:58PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
To be brief, ...
Darren, if you want to do something really directly useful for the DBI
ecosystem I would encorage you (or anyone else) to work on creating a
DBI test suite that's independent of the DBI distribution.
Tim.
p.s. I'm
Tim Bunce wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 01:13:58PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
To be brief, ...
Darren, if you want to do something really directly useful for the DBI
ecosystem I would encorage you (or anyone else) to work on creating a
DBI test suite that's independent of the DBI
To be brief, ...
I don't know if this has come up in past discussions about the next major DBI
version, but I'll say it now, since its also what I'm doing with my own
DBI-alike ecosystem to be.
I believe that DBI should go away as an actual piece of code and instead be
replaced by an API
Replying to myself, ...
I believe that this fundamental design change can be accomplished with almost
full or entirely backwards-compatibility to existing DBI-using codebases.
This partly by a DBI package still being available which essentially provides
shims for people saying
I was sent a response to this off-list, part of which I'll reply to on-list.
The response bit was:
What happens to the 'which drivers are available' part of the DBI interface?
To this I say:
The API definition would say that each DBD has something which can be easily
scanned for, and so an
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote:
So what say you?
-- Darren Duncan
I think you can do this without any change to DBI.
You have your own DBI-like framework; you could declare that anything
that passes your conformance suite
is compliant, and offer
David Nicol wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote:
So what say you?
I think you can do this without any change to DBI.
You have your own DBI-like framework; you could declare that anything
that passes your conformance suite
is compliant, and
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote:
How mandatory, currently, is the mandatory shared codebase? Are
there really traps and snares preventing
a different framework from using DBD modules? I'm presuming that there
aren't; ICBW.
So getting away from the
David Nicol wrote:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote:
How mandatory, currently, is the mandatory shared codebase? Are
there really traps and snares preventing
a different framework from using DBD modules? I'm presuming that there
aren't; ICBW.
So
David Nicol wrote:
Are you asking for something beyond documenting the DBI/DBD interface
to the point where a DBD can be used more directly than through the
DBI? Aside from requesting that everyone abandon the framework
mentality?
Are you asking for a stronger set of conventions in DBDs that
15 matches
Mail list logo