Pierre Joye wrote:
Hi Chris,
On Feb 14, 2008 2:48 AM, Christopher Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pierre Joye wrote:
> The targets were these/this companies(y) pushing CLA in php.net when
> it is not necessary to contribute. It has been proven already since
> months on a nearly daily basis.
>
> For example:
> http://blogs.oracle.com/opal/discuss/msgReader$268
My understanding is that because of its collaborative nature,
contributing to PDO V2 has new and very different implications.
You mean its collaborative and restrictive nature?
No - its collaborative nature.
Arguments using past contributions to show the ad-hoc development
model is feasible are (unfortunately) not tenable
Again, please see my other posts. Since my last post, nothing has been
brought to the list to clarify the situation. Important questions like
who is asking a CLA
That has already been stated. This is not an "us and them"
situation since each party has different requirements.
who will contribute and what will be brought on board?
That has also been stated: expertise and person-power.
The fine points will depend on the community, a term that includes data
access providers (I'm using that name since not all are actual "vendors"),
and the model the community chooses to accept.
> Why did they not take contact with us?
We did. It just took a very long time. Think of it as a normal "is
this idea possible" chat that took place in very, very, very slow motion.
Chris
--
Christopher Jones, Oracle
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: +1 650 506 8630
Blog: http://blogs.oracle.com/opal/ Free PHP Book: http://tinyurl.com/f8jad
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
