On 12.06.2010, at 15:54, Ilia Alshanetsky wrote: > The concerns you raised about custom methods specific to database drivers > were not reflective of the PDO's intent as was clarified by Wez and myself. > > The code that was introduced was specific to PostgreSQL, the common > functionality was introduced in a way that allows each driver to implement.
I agree with Ilia on this. Piece of functionality which is "common" was implemented in generic way. Piece of functionality which is not "common" was implemented as postgresql-specific extension. That's exactly how it should be and the fact of updates to PDO is awesome on it's own. > On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> hi Ilia, >> >> So you basically say that the worries and wishes raised here are >> simply irrelevant and at the end of the day you decide what PDO can or >> cannot be? >> >> I'm very disappointed by these two commits. I don't think it is the >> way we should develop PDO and it is clear that I'm not the only one to >> think that. As it is trunk, I won't battle too much to revert it but >> be sure that is not something I will let in for any of the upcoming >> releases as it is clearly bad design. >> >> Cheers, >> -- >> Pierre -- Alexey Zakhlestin http://www.milkfarmsoft.com/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
