Re: Some PEAR remarks

Hello, James Cox wrote: > stop. > > you go make your metabase, with your common format timestamp > functionality, we'll stick with PEAR. > > It's clear you don't want to do PEAR unless it's your way, so why do > you not do the gentlemanly thing and just go away? You are wrong, Lukas PEARified Metabase to satisfy your demands of formatting rules. So it is no longer my way. It is not even name Metabase. Lukas named it MDB. Are you going to object on the name to use it as an excuse to boycott the merger? > In fact, why don't you write a new version of PHP to support your > common format timestamp (which conforms to ansi, yada yada yada). Humm... this common format timestamp is a new type of excuse. You are just confirming that whatever is done to satisfy the so called PEAR standards you will always bring up a yet another excuse to boycott Metabase-PEAR-DB merger. > To be honest, PHP needs a decent Database Abstraction Layer, written > in C, as part of php4/ext/ ... and low and behold, there is such a > project. You forgot that the migration to C is part of the whole plan. But to be succesful it have to be done in such way that it will not break people's software and the migration path does not become discouraging or else it will hardly be worthy it. So first we provide PEAR-DB API capable of Metabase portability features that the current PEAR-DB lacks and then we move on to C. In the end there will be no PHP code of anybody, not of Manuel, Lukas, Tomas, Stig, just C code. This is the most realistic way to reaching some results as soon as possible. > Really. > > there is no gain from your continued rants. I don't want to see a > Metabase PEAR DB merger, simply because of your attitude. That seems to be yet another excuse for avoding the issue. Manuel Lemos