[DBIx-Class-Devel] doc fixes

[rabbit+dbic at rabbit.us]

On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 10:19:09AM -0500, Brendan Byrd wrote:
> 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.

+1

> > 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.

I am a bit concerned about a massive =head1 with the non-descriptive name
NOTE. Perhaps we need a better strategy for the future.

Nevertheless merged as-is (after rebasing). Generally it is always a good
idea to rebase your branches *before* asking for review - a reviewer
may not have the ability to resolve conflicts if such arise from a rebase.

`git fetch && git rebase origin/master`

I also noticed you did more work on docs-pod-inherit - parts of 43b11a1b
duplicate (and conflict with) stuff in 47589465 which already landed in
master. Again - a rebase before beginning work would have saved you this.

Cheers