On Wednesday, July 26, 2017 at 10:32:55 PM UTC-7, Aryk Grosz wrote:
>
> Yeah, the implementation is super simple because you are basically 
> skipping a method. I think though if you are already going to have a 
> plugin, you may as well give a little functionality to actually make it 
> useful.
>

The plugin is actually useful now for many users, even if it doesn't handle 
your particular use case directly.
 

> It seems likely someone would want this general functionality on bulk 
> inserts, and opt-in specifically when that happens. This plugin was created 
> and designed for instances like those, but because of the rigid 
> implementation, can't really use it selectively.
>

It's been 7 years since the plugin was added and this is the first request 
for such a feature.  So you may want to reconsider how likely it is someone 
would want this.
 

> Wouldn't take much to throw in an instance accessor.
>

"Wouldn't take much..." can be used to justify just about any additional 
feature/scope creep.
 

> I can PR it if you want, but if you think it shouldn't belong with this 
> plugin, I'll just do it locally...
>

If other Sequel users express the need for the feature, then I can 
reconsider.  But before adding support for a feature and committing to 
supporting it for a long time, I need to be convinced there is a general 
need for it.

Thanks,
Jeremy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sequel-talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to