Re: Re: [metabase-dev] MDB news

Hello, On 09/15/2002 06:15 PM, Peter Bowyer wrote:

It seems that you get in the middle of the threads and never noticed that I always try to make people see why things are not as good as they can be and explaining why. That is being diplomatic.

I have followed this thread through from the beginning. I have read every message in it. My comments are based on reading them all.

I do that, the problem is that people tend to ignore the points until you are direct and put the things the way they are.

The problem is you *think* you do that, but it doesn't come over like that.

That is because you already decided to be biased against me.

You should pay more attention and read threads from the beginning. Some threads are just continuation of old subjects. Read the archives instead of jumping to conclusions based on just the last messages.

See above.... I've read nearly every thread on this list in which you have posted since Jan 2001 when I first joined. I have an archive of certain ones as they generally contain good, informative content.

When it comes to Metabase, the story goes back to late 1999 when I announce the first Metabase betas. Stig was starting PEAR and when he saw the announcement we was willing to discourage me to develop yet another database abstraction package because he thought I had just started it. By then Metabase was already very mature because it was under private development for about 1 year. I waited that long so I could test the whole API with different significant database before I was sure I would not need to change the API after public release. I explained that to Stig, but still he decided to carry on with PEAR and PEAR-DB later. Can you imagine the amount of heated discussions that could have been avoided if Stig was more open to cooperate then in Metabase rather than kick his own API? Do you see why missing relevant parts of history makes people jump in discussions with inappropriate arguments?

You seem like those that want to solve the conflicts of the middle-east without understanding the history of at least the last 6 decades. That way the problems will never be solved. No, I am not going to explain what this means. Do your homework, study history and learn how things got to be the way they are.

... and stop assuming that everyone else is an idiot. I know the above

I did not assume anything, I was just willing to avoid having to make further explanations.

(pity the politicians don't). I'd actually say that you need to go back much further than 6 decades though - IMHO the book of Genesis is a good place to start for Middle East history ;-)

Sure, that was why I said at least 6 decades. -- Regards, Manuel Lemos