> -Original Message-
> From: Lukas Kahwe Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 2:15 PM
> To: Christopher Jones
> Cc: Pierre Joye; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; PHP Internals
> Subject: Re: [PDO] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PDO] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [PDO] Re:
&g
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> However the point here is. There is a proposal on the table to change
> the php.net project to be able to bring in developers we do not know,
> for code they have not yet written, for specs they have not yet
> contributed. This is flipping our development process upsid
On 14.02.2008, at 22:19, Christopher Jones wrote:
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 14.02.2008, at 22:07, Christopher Jones wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Pierre Joye wrote:
>>
>> > You (as group)
>>
>> We are individuals, all members of the mail lists.
>
> Ok, could the Microsoft and IBM people on this lis
On 14.02.2008, at 23:06, Christopher Jones wrote:
I think most multi-person plans that impact an existing OSS project
have had some genesis in private discussions before being broadcast.
For PDO V2, this discussion was just really slow and intermittent.
Yeah, I am basically fine with this. I
Pierre Joye wrote:
> As we all agree that poor drivers are not welcome (and great drivers
> are...), the problem here is not about improving PHP database support
> (call it PDOv2 or DBDOv3) but to introduce CLA'ed areas in PHP, php
> core or PECL. It would be nice to dissociate the two and to be
Hi Chris,
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Christopher Jones
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The code and strength of contributions and maintenance is the ultimate
> evidence of what can be trusted. Poor quality drivers, if they are
> distributed via a PECL-only distribution, will acquire their
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 14.02.2008, at 22:07, Christopher Jones wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Pierre Joye wrote:
>>
>> > You (as group)
>>
>> We are individuals, all members of the mail lists.
>
> Ok, could the Microsoft and IBM people on this list please speak up
> then? Could also one of the Oracl
On 14.02.2008, at 22:07, Christopher Jones wrote:
Pierre Joye wrote:
> You (as group)
We are individuals, all members of the mail lists.
Ok, could the Microsoft and IBM people on this list please speak up
then? Could also one of the Oracle internals guys speak up on this
list? That is
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> OSS is a collaborative process that is not about some manager
> allocating some ressources here and there. People usually make
> personal commitments here and maybe this is the bigger culture clash
> than the CLA.
Oracle contributes to a range of open source projects,
Pierre Joye wrote:
> You (as group)
We are individuals, all members of the mail lists.
> Tell us the names of these entities, companies or persons, who are
> going to contribute and what are actually their requirements.
The general list of data access providers has been given before and
isn'
Pierre Joye schrieb:
Tell us the names of these entities, companies or persons, who are
going to contribute and what are actually their requirements. What
will they bring (saying "expertise" is not something I can buy)? I
don't understand what is so hard to understand that it is a minimum to
get
On 14.02.2008, at 04:04, Steph Fox wrote:
Tell us the names of these entities, companies or persons, who are
going to contribute and what are actually their requirements. What
will they bring (saying "expertise" is not something I can buy)? I
don't understand what is so hard to understand that
Tell us the names of these entities, companies or persons, who are
going to contribute and what are actually their requirements. What
will they bring (saying "expertise" is not something I can buy)? I
don't understand what is so hard to understand that it is a minimum to
get before we can even dis
Hi Chris,
On Feb 14, 2008 3:30 AM, Christopher Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> 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
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 bas
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.
> >
> >
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 becaus
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 22:11:54 +0100, "Pierre Joye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Globally -1. I'm against any CLA in php.net. It was a mistake in the
> first place to accept restricted modules. There is many repositories
> out there, and the companies that need a CLA also have the resource
Pierre, since you choose to ignore the mails I sent to your "secret" address,
I'm taking this to the list, maybe this will be noticed: Pay what you owe me!
--Jani
Pierre Joye kirjoitti:
Hi,
On Feb 2, 2008 12:15 PM, Richard Quadling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If there is no CLA, will that mea
On Feb 2, 2008 3:14 PM, Wez Furlong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pierre,
>
> At no point have I or anyone else said that the future of PDO depends
> on a CLA.
>
> --Wez.
No, you did not say it explicitally. However you said that many
vendors, experts or leaders will not contribute or will not supp
Hi,
On Feb 2, 2008 12:15 PM, Richard Quadling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there is no CLA, will that mean we will not get the PDO 2 drivers
> we need to be able to communicate with the databases?
It would be really nice if the pro CLA camp stops to condition the
existence of PDO (or its futur
If there is no CLA, will that mean we will not get the PDO 2 drivers
we need to be able to communicate with the databases?
Could, for example, MySQL say without a CLA we are not contributing code?
If so, what is the alternatives? Wait until we have some hacked up
version from someone not on the i
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> On 02.02.2008 01:10, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg wrote:
> > We change the rules all the time to fit the needs of PHP.
>
> Do we?
Sure. PHP 3 was dual licensed under the GPL. We introduced the Zend
License. We moved the PHP Manual under an Open Publication
On Feb 2, 2008 12:51 AM, Marcus Boerger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Pierre,
>
> in some places of the world what he wrote might be ok in the way he
> wrote it.
In every places in the world you have to respect the existing rules
and usages or you better have to leave if you don't want to.
Hello Pierre,
in some places of the world what he wrote might be ok in the way he
wrote it. In some this wouldn't be acceptable at all. Contributing to PHP
for a long time now and knowing Tony I a) couldn't care less and b) guess I
know what he wanted to say and prefer to understand it as such.
On 02.02.2008 01:10, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg wrote:
> We change the rules all the time to fit the needs of PHP.
Do we?
> This may not be one of those times, or this may not be the way to go, but I
> think
> the concept of having better support from database companies is one
> that at least de
On Feb 1, 2008 11:10 PM, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Antony Dovgal wrote:
>
> > On 01.02.2008 23:26, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> > > Sorry for not writing this earlier. So how does this idea sound?
> >
> > It sounds quite bad.
> >
> > If you want to do so
On Sat, 2 Feb 2008, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> On 01.02.2008 23:26, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> > Sorry for not writing this earlier. So how does this idea sound?
>
> It sounds quite bad.
>
> If you want to do something good for PHP - either respect its rules, or go
> away.
> Changing the rules to fit yo
On 01.02.2008 23:26, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Sorry for not writing this earlier. So how does this idea sound?
It sounds quite bad.
If you want to do something good for PHP - either respect its rules, or go away.
Changing the rules to fit your needs is not acceptable.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal
-
Hi,
Globally -1. I'm against any CLA in php.net. It was a mistake in the
first place to accept restricted modules. There is many repositories
out there, and the companies that need a CLA also have the resources
to create their own PECL channels. But they may not have the fantastic
advantages broug
Hey Marcus—
On 1-Feb-08, at 3:26 PM, Marcus Boerger wrote:
* Develop a PECL CLA that can optionally be used for PECL projects.
* If necessary, adapt the PHP License, so that it works nicely
together with the CLA.
IMO (and FWIW), CLAs do not belong in any official php.net project. I
have al
Hello all,
So after the initial uproar on last week's attempts to put parts
of PHP development under the terms of a CLA, a bunch of us actually
spent some time in finding solutions for one way or the other. I
don't want to bother you with more details on the why.
One thing for certain, we want PD
32 matches
Mail list logo
