Re: [RFC] An Idea for PDO 2
| From: | Antony Dovgal | Date: | Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:37:48 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] An Idea for PDO 2 | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.internals php.pdo |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-35084@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 02.02.2008 01:10, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg wrote:
> We change the rules all the time to fit the needs of PHP.
Do we?
> This may not be one of those times, or this may not be the way to go, but I think
> the concept of having better support from database companies is one
> that at least deserves the benefit of a dialog.
Sure, that's what the "dialog" is - they asked if they could set their
own rules and we said "no".
That's what the discussion is - they've asked a question and got an answer.
We've discussed it long enough to be sure, and the answer is "NO".
> Furthermore, I think Marcus has contributed enough to PHP that he does
> not deserve to hear that what would be good for PHP is for him to "go
> away."
Wait a second... "Somebody has contributed enough, so everybody should agree with him"?
Do I get it right?
I do respect Marcus (as well as everybody else, doesn't matter how big
his/her contribution is), but this doesn't matter I agree.
And I really do think that such an attempt to add a half-closed-source module into PHP
project MUST be rejected, as it violates all the rules and basically sets a new rule:
everybody can do anything he/she wants to do for no reason.
> PDO opinions aside, I don't think any of us would actually
> think that would put PHP in a more healthy situation.
Openness is healthy.
Adding new rules to make lawyers happy is not.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal