Re: Re: [metabase-dev] RE: [PEAR-DEV] New MetabaseAniversary release
| From: | Manuel Lemos | Date: | Wed, 23 Jan 2002 21:16:05 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [metabase-dev] RE: [PEAR-DEV] New MetabaseAniversary release | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.db php.general php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-4133@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hello,
"Tomas V.V.Cox" wrote:
>
> El mar, 22-01-2002 a las 19:02, Manuel Lemos escribió:
> > Hello Lukas,
> >
> > Lukas Smith wrote:
> >
> > > FYI: there has been a lot of discussion about this project in the last
> > > couple months (especially december irrc) on the pear-dev mailinglist. So
> > > some questions might allready be answered there.
> >
> > >From what I read lately I could not come to any conclusion. It seemed
> > that most people were in favour except for Tomas that said he would not
> > use it if I got him right.
>
> I'm not against, if you read my reply to Lukas I was the only one
It was not clear whether you were accepting to add Metabase to PEAR
independently of PEAR-DB or as a new implementation of PEAR-DB API.
> offering help to him in the task. What I also said was that I will
> continue supporting PEAR DB. If that project becomes a reality and
> provides at least the features PEAR DB has, the compatibility to the
> actual API is maintained, good features are added and this is finally
> adopted I would start to think in developing for it. But not before as
> PEAR DB has a good amount of users (and I include my self in it) who
> needs continue their work/projects.
The same for Metabase and its users.
>
> > My opinion is that you should hear a clear yes or no answer from
> > somebody in charge of PEAR organization before you have a go, or else
> > you may be wasting your time working on something based on expectations
> > that may not exactly be what you think.
>
> You have heared the opinion of Stig and it is not so different of my
> position.
>
> In short for me: yes, please go ahead.
Ok, Lukas will be working on making the proof of concept first.
Regards,
Manuel Lemos