On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 09:11:27PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > I just checked and the DBIx-Perform tarball is still there in
> > /W/WE/WEAV; I've "undeleted" the files.
> >
> > If you want to re-index it as DBIx::Perform I'm all for it.
>
> Thanks :)
>
> I think it would be easiest all round if
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 11:25:32AM -0800, Eric Weaver wrote:
> Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 07:44:43AM -0800, Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> >
> >>[...]
> >>
> >>Just who's authoritative here? Autrijus or you?
> >
> >No one. I said "if you are willing ... would be appreciated".
> >If no
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 01:49:46PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 09:40:17PM -0800, Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> > So, what's the official word from the modules-keepers? ::Informix:: or not?
>
> The official word is: keep the DBIx::Informix::Perform namespace
> with our blessing,
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 09:40:17PM -0800, Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> So, what's the official word from the modules-keepers? ::Informix:: or not?
The official word is: keep the DBIx::Informix::Perform namespace
with our blessing, and please accept my personal apology for letting
you be troubled with t
So, what's the official word from the modules-keepers? ::Informix:: or not?
I still have the cvs checkout from before the ::Informix:: change
(being a little behind on that sort of thing) and can go back to that. If
not, I'll check in the change at Sourceforge.
Thanks
Eric Weaver
grumpy develo
On Tue, Apr 01, 2003 at 04:29:14AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 09:09:29PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > It's up to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to avoid it setting any precedents.
>
> I mistakenly looked at DBIx::OracleSequence and DBIx::MSSQLReporter in
> the module list and thought
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 09:09:29PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> It's up to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to avoid it setting any precedents.
I mistakenly looked at DBIx::OracleSequence and DBIx::MSSQLReporter in
the module list and thought that it's okay for DBIx::Informix::Perform
to go in; now I see that, foll
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 08:42:06AM -0800, Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> Tim Bunce wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 07:24:55AM -0800, Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> >
> >>Tim Bunce wrote:
> >>
> >>>We have Oracle::* and others. An Informix::* namespace seems
> >>>best for this.
> >>
> >>Too late. Besides, I *a
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 05:19:01PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> I believe there is no need to "clarify" trademark issues in module
> names. (In the same way that domain names that include a tradename
> don't have to include the owner of the trademark.) All that's
> needed is for the module *documenta
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 07:24:55AM -0800, Eric C. Weaver wrote:
> Tim Bunce wrote:
> >We have Oracle::* and others. An Informix::* namespace seems
> >best for this.
>
> Too late. Besides, I *already* renamed it from DBIx::Perform to make
> AURIJUS happy.
>
> >The DBIx::* space is best for modul
Tim Bunce wrote:
We have Oracle::* and others. An Informix::* namespace seems
best for this.
Too late. Besides, I *already* renamed it from DBIx::Perform to make AURIJUS
happy.
The DBIx::* space is best for modules that are not database specific.
Actually, this is not database specific. I've be
We have Oracle::* and others. An Informix::* namespace seems
best for this.
The DBIx::* space is best for modules that are not database specific.
Tim.
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 09:28:08AM +0200, Perl Authors Upload Server wrote:
>
> The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module Li
12 matches
Mail list logo
