[DBIx-Class-Devel] doc fixes

[Brendan Byrd]

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+dbic at rabbit.us> wrote:
> No :) I merged the authorship update d77f6ff82[1], but 383211ab7 has a
> bunch of problems without its other sibling:

Okay, I removed that commit from the branch, since it's already in master.

> - lib/DBIx/Class/Core.pm refers to a not-yet existing class

Fixed and pushed.

> - You were going to clarify the blurb about why one should prefer
>   $column_accessor with mst and/or abraxxa (see last section of [2]).
>   The way it is worded   currently makes no sense. Also "this will not
>   store the data" is better written as "commit to storage" or something
>   like that - it does store the data in the object obv.

Talked with the team about it on IRC.  I believe the consensus was
that there were a few different reasons why accessors were
"recommended", but Castaway warned "recommended implies alternatives..
ideally should avoid doing that".  I'm going to go with her suggestion
on just stating what the accessor does, instead of detailing any
reasons why to use it.

If we need to expand upon it, we can do it on a later patch.  The
current wording is already better than what we didn't have.

> - The id() documentation is removed from Row before the PI stuff is available
>   This is a rather "hot" method, I rather we not have releases where it is
>   hard to find its docs

Re-added and pushed.

> There are also some inconsistencies in the =head1 NOTE, especuially the
> "should inherit from Core" part. Here is a version that feels more factually
> correct to me - incorporate whatever you deem useful.

Actually, that looks good.  I'll add that into the commit.

Ready for re-review.

-- 
Brendan Byrd <Perl at ResonatorSoft.org>
Brendan Byrd <BBYRD at CPAN.org>