Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On 04/10/16 19:08, Matt S Trout wrote: > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 12:49:49PM -0400, Ashley Pond V wrote: >> I did say MST RFC:MUST be respected. :P This is only here because of >> you. I was an early CDBI user and was there for the fights over its >> direction and saw you as the voice of reason,

[Dbix-class] A slightly more concrete proposal

Since people seem to be unsure as to what the alternative to riba's project freeze would actually be, let me provide something a little more concrete. This is intended as a basis for discussion rather than a complete plan, but I thought it was worth at least sketching a shape for things to come.

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

Peter Mottram wrote: > DBIx::Class has gained a reputation for being a solid piece of > infrastructure which can be trusted and ribasushi has been instrumental > in getting it to that point. Care must be taken to ensure that this > expectation of reliability is not lost in

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

As I mentioned, I think it would be great to understand what Peter is thinking about a "freeze" – whether that's no new releases ever, or security/critical-bug-fix releases only, general bug fixes only, or something else. I think it would be perfectly reasonable for people to say "we want

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

I did say MST RFC:MUST be respected. :P This is only here because of you. I was an early CDBI user and was there for the fights over its direction and saw you as the voice of reason, patience, and vision. Regardless of work done since, I see you as the owner. I was unaware there was as much of a

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 12:49:49PM -0400, Ashley Pond V wrote: > I did say MST RFC:MUST be respected. :P This is only here because of > you. I was an early CDBI user and was there for the fights over its > direction and saw you as the voice of reason, patience, and vision. > Regardless of work

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 08:20:51PM +0200, Peter Mottram wrote: > On 04/10/16 19:08, Matt S Trout wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 12:49:49PM -0400, Ashley Pond V wrote: > >> I did say MST RFC:MUST be respected. :P This is only here because of > >> you. I was an early CDBI user and was there for

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

Hello, all. I don't talk here much, because of the excellent work done by the DBIC teams over the years. I've read along and learned a lot, though, and used DBIC professionally. First, thank you to mst, Ribasushi, and all the other contributors for their hard work in stabilizing DBIC and

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 09:43:56PM +0100, Leo Lapworth wrote: > On 4 October 2016 at 21:35, Christian Walde wrote: > > On Mon, 03 Oct 2016 23:32:18 +0200, rabbit+dbic at wrote: > > > >> Nevertheless, if nobody else finds this problematic: I will step aside > >> and let

Re: [Dbix-class] A slightly more concrete proposal

I agree with this proposal that Matt stated, it seems solid to me. I will also say that I intend to be a significant DBIC contributor personally starting in the near future, estimated about 1 month from now. Initially that will take the form of significant new core features developed in an

Re: [Dbix-class] A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

I and the company I work for are a heavy user of DBIC. We consider it's well being and stability to have been amazing so far. Having largely single developer maintain the project has always amazed me, and as great as some of the results have been in the past, it doesn't look like it's really a

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On 4 October 2016 at 21:35, Christian Walde wrote: > On Mon, 03 Oct 2016 23:32:18 +0200, rabbit+dbic at wrote: > >> Nevertheless, if nobody else finds this problematic: I will step aside >> and let an eager community, inadvertently suppressed all these years, >> steer

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

Hi, On 4/10/16 1:15 AM, "Ashley Pond V" wrote: >RIBASUSHI has given this codebase a tremendous amount of care, >improvement, and deft effort. I am a user and evangelist of DBIC since >it was the first fork of CDBI that started to solve so many problems. >Peter has solved many

Re: [Dbix-class] A slightly more concrete proposal

On 10/04/2016 04:17 PM, Matt S Trout wrote: Since people seem to be unsure as to what the alternative to riba's project freeze would actually be, let me provide something a little more concrete. This is intended as a basis for discussion rather than a complete plan, but I thought it was worth

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On 2016-10-04 6:41 PM, Matt S Trout wrote: Meanwhile: Riba presents https://web.archive.org/web/20161004214347/http://blogs.perl.org/users/peter_rabbitson/2013/07/crowdsourcing-self-confidence.html#comment-1129854 as a to-him unamnbiguous legitimisation of his first come, except that in there

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 4:31 AM, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > I again must stress that there has been a huge 9+ months "discussion > period" during which nobody (besides mst) came forward expressing > concerns regarding my plans. I had a lot of things to say, but I find that

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

Meanwhile: Riba presents https://web.archive.org/web/20161004214347/http://blogs.perl.org/users/peter_rabbitson/2013/07/crowdsourcing-self-confidence.html#comment-1129854 as a to-him unamnbiguous legitimisation of his first come, except that in there my entire goal was to turn DBIx::Class into

Re: [Dbix-class] IMPORTANT: A discussion of DBIC governance and future development

On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 11:21:36AM +0100, Pedro Melo wrote: > Hi, > > On 4/10/16 1:15 AM, "Ashley Pond V" wrote: > >My view: MST must be respected but I personally defer to RIBASUSHI and > >his judgement. I say, what he says, goes. He has earned the benefit of > >the doubt. At least until it can