On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:04:29PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 03:23:30PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
I'd be happy in principle, although some guidance would be welcome
Also in particular, what needs to continue happening across an API
change? Is it just that a
Perfect! Applied. Many thanks Dave.
Tim.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:48:31AM +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:04:29PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 03:23:30PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
I'd be happy in principle, although some guidance would be
Am 02.03.2012 16:11, schrieb Tim Bunce:
[...]
However, I'd still like to make the change. So I'm thinking it might be
best to support *both* mechanisms for at least a few releases before
removing the old one. The gives end users a safe zone where they
can upgrade the DBI and then later upgrade
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 03:11:17PM +, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 03:27:24PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
I'm concerned that changing the API, and thus forcing all compiled
drivers to be recompiled at the same time the DBI is installed,
isn't worth the gain. Especially as
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 03:23:30PM +, Dave Mitchell wrote:
I'd be happy in principle, although some guidance would be welcome
Also in particular, what needs to continue happening across an API
change? Is it just that a driver, compiled and installed against an old
DBI, must continue to work
