[Dbix-class] Decision time: which fork inherits the existing DBIx::Class namespace

[Sam Kington]

Hi,

Delurking; I’ve been following the discussion but haven’t said anything previously because I haven’t historically been part of the DBIx::Class community, nor have I been using the distribution for that long.

Also, I’ve struggled to understand what Peter Rabbitson’s problem with Perl, CPAN authors and the likes has been, despite reading a number of his blog and mailing list posts. This first bit is another example of such:

On 3 Dec 2016, at 05:50, Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+dbic at rabbit.us> wrote:
> I do, however, firmly believe that Matt's perspective[1] of:
> 
>> I don't really think open source is *about* the people developing as
>> such. What I think is that open source is *made of* the people
>> developing it
> 
> is more or less an embodiment of what is wrong with the Open Source
> industry today.

…and then he just leaves it at that.

Well, at some points you just have to say “it’s not me, it’s you”. I have no idea what that means, but Peter’s clearly not interested in explaining. No doubt this all makes sense in his head, and to the small handful of people who have been arguing with Peter for years on this subject, but it leaves me none the wiser.

But OK, not everyone is a trained writer, and by all accounts Peter’s technical skills are superb. So I was intrigued to hear this next bit:

> The name of the fork is not interesting - the important thing is that it
> will continue providing the DBIx::Class namespace ( via a novel method,
> with safe-by-default conflict-resolution at install time, very much
> *un*like the Alt convention ). This means that a user willing to
> "switch" will have to adjust nothing more than their list of dependencies.

…and again nothing. How will this cunning plan work? What does “safe-by-default conflict-resolution at install time” even mean? Will it work for people installing DBIx::Class or support modules via Linux distributions’ package managers, not just via CPAN.pm, cpanm or similar? Given that Peter also wants the PAUSE rights to the DBIx::Class namespace (which makes me wonder why he’s even talking about the name of the fork if he wants to still call it DBIx::Class), is there any reason why Peter’s DBIx::Class would even have to care about this stuff at all?

The time for something like this was months ago when the split was first mooted. Now it feels, wilfully or not, like vapourware.

Sam
-- 
Website: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/