RE: [PEAR-DEV] general questions

Coming from a completely '3rd Party' and a user of the systems here... > -----Original Message----- > From: Manuel Lemos [mailto:mlemos@acm.org] > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 8:28 PM > To: pear-dev@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] general questions > > > Hello, > > Joao Prado Maia wrote: > > > > On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Manuel Lemos wrote: > > > > > > So you are saying that a PEAR-DB wrapper will be > created on top of > > > > Metabase, so we have all the features quickly. Well, > the problem > > > > here is that Lukas Smith doesn't seem too fond of the current > > > > PEAR-DB API, as he described ever so interestingly about his > > > > opinions of the fetch*() methods. If he doesn't do a full port, > > > > how is this a real wrapper of the PEAR-DB API if a lot of its > > > > methods are missing ? > > > > > > You got him wrong. He explained that to you. I hope you > stop raising > > > objections because you are only stalling the progress. > > > > > > > There is no progress Manuel, please understand this. If he > is the one > > doing the wrapper why is this thread keeping him from > working ? He can > > work on whatever he wants, and like I told him we will give him the > > suggestions for changes. > > There is no progress because you keep raising the same > objections based on your misunderstandings of what people > keep trying to tell you that it is not as you think, but you > insist on misunderstanding making people spend a lot of time > replying to you persistent objections instead of working on > making progress in what was proposed. There is no progress because _you_ keep raising the same objections to people's questions and concerns based on your opinions of what people _should_ be thinking and _should_ be doing. You made a proposal. Not a mandate. Now some very intelligent people had very intelligent concerns. They brought these concerns to the table to be discussed. As a person who has kept very close eye on this thread from the beginning with your original post and has read everyone, and as a person who has developed none of these systems, but have tried them all, I can tell you I read every post carefully because I was intrigued by your original proposal. You had a _great_ idea. Your follow-through was terrible. Rather than constantly repeat the same thing over and over again ( MetaBase has more features, and not adopting it (in some manner, etc) is dumb ) discuss the issues your peers have come up with. And I hate to say it, but that was your whole point. That is what you kept repeating, kept announcing over and over again, and what you made it seem like. Rather than repeat again and again what you are saying, I propose that you first understand what the other developer is asking. You mention several times "why do I have to repeat myself over and over again" and yet I count many times where it seems like you never even tried to understand what the developers are asking. Addressing these concerns are more important than anything else. Remember, even if the concern isn't relevant in _your_ eyes, it doesn't mean they are _not_ relevant. What _you_ fail to realize is that your so-called features are features for _you_. What you _claim_ to be features are not features to everyone. So stop saying that in mere features your system wins, because for many educated people, your so-called features weren't features, but draw backs. The best thing you can do before trying to capture the PEAR user base (which is what you need to do, if the PEAR users don't want to use your system, they won't) is understand what they like about PEAR. Some of use, myself included, made an educated decision on why NOT to use Metabase and chose ADODB or PEAR or PHPLib over it. Just because Metabase works for you doesn't mean it works for everyone. I will refrain from making any comparisons with Mircosoft here. I know you are smart enough to understand this and know it to be true. > > I don't know what you do for a living, but most of us work, > so there is no time nor patience left to replying to your > annoying messages repeating the same misunderstandings. I > don't see any good will on your part in trying to understand > that we only want to have the best for PHP which in this case > is having only one database abstraction layer based on > something that exists today with highly desirable features. For who? What desirable features do you talk about? Stop being so general in statements like this. I know many developers who would love Metabase, and many who wouldn't. Reasons NOT for Metabase? Currently is has not manner on which to handle stored procedures as one example. Another is that using a light front API layer like PEAR's is faster (No, I don't have benchmarks to prove it, its simple fact and you are a smart enough man to know it, the more abstraction, the slower the system. Period.) in response time. Sure, moving a complete database over isn't going to work with something like PEAR, but neither will it now with your meta system. SQL queries to the database will still have to be rewritten for optimization, new triggers will have to be written up, etc. The idea of simulating auto_increment in MySQL seems less than optimized (going by what I have read in your manual/tutorial), and is something that really turned me off. That was NOT a feature I wanted, hack attempts to make everything work (which is what it seems like in some cases from a user point of view). > If you disagree, explain yourself and present alternatives to > what was proposed. Your proposal was sound, your follow through wasn't. If you don't try to understand these developer's concerns with your proposal, regardless of what you think, nothing will come of it. > If you do not have anything constructive > to add to the discussion, don't bug us again with your > persistent misunderstandings. Communication is a 2 way road. A misunderstanding on my part means you did not do your job at conveying your message to me. Rather than complain that you have to repeat yourself, ask yourself "If I am repeating what they didn't understand, while will they understand it this time?". Stop, understand what they are asking/saying, and then respond. Rather than assume that because they have a question or concern you think is unrelated that they don't understand what you are saying, try and understand why they are saying what they are. Maybe you are at fault. > > If you want to keep replying to this message just to be the > one to say the last thing, be aware that from now on I am not > going to reply to any messages of yours on this thread. I > certainly have better things to do than to keep replying the > same things. Which is a problem. Manuel, you had a good idea. Metabase has good features. Its not for everyone, and many intelligent people, far more intelligent than any of use here, =)), have made educated choices on the options presented for them, whether it be ADODB, Metabase, Pear, PHPLib, Native Calls, or rolling their own. Each has its merits, even if it's the layout of the code, the API, the way it works, the phase of the moon, the color of the ink, or the sound of the music. You seem too ego driven in your drive to install Metabase as the PEAR DB system. This is not an insult, merely an observation. A point this out NOT to be vindictive, I have nothing to gain other than a quality DB system by saying any of this, and I only wish to see a resolution to this madness. Things do not happen over night. Many people have raised intelligent concerns that you have ignored or simply replied to with the same answer "Why do I have to keep repeating myself...". Why do you?? People understand your point, maybe you don't understand their point. We are ALL wrong at some point. Your proposal was a great idea, but great ideas always have problems. Developing software is like writing a book. A writer doesn't write, a writer rewrites, and rewrites, and rewrites until he is done. Your idea was written, now its time to rewrite. Rather than respond to this and argue against an opinion, take a step back and ask yourself why I would have taken my time to write this. What reason at all do I have to write this? I am not John Lim, so you can't use the 'I have a commercial db project'. I am not proclaiming my support for any system ( I have tried 3 of them, and like features from each for different reasons), and the only thing I want is to see cooperation on a single DB system. My opinions are stated simply, in plain english. Understand only that I hope this may help you better shed some light on what is going on here, and to help end the 'technical flamewar' that has arisen. If you feel the urge to respond to this, keep it off the list, and respond to me in person. If you really want to do something, stop. Breath, relax. Write down firmly what you want, and post it here for comments. And then address the comments as serious concerns, whether you think its important or not. Someone thinks it's important enough to take the time to write, so it must be important to them. Thank you for your time, Jason Lotito jason@lehighweb.com www.NewbieNetwork.net > > Regards, > Manuel Lemos > > -- > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, e-mail: pear-dev-unsubscribe@lists.php.net > For additional commands, e-mail: pear-dev-help@lists.php.net > To contact the list administrators, e-mail: > php-list-admin@lists.php.net >