[Dbix-class] Clarification on the split-namespace proposal

[Peter Rabbitson]

On 10/23/2016 10:55 PM, Christian Walde wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 22:19:42 +0200, Andrew Beverley <andy at andybev.com>
> wrote:
>
>> - Riba was prepared to keep maintaining (and "tightening" in slower
>> time) "DBIC"
>
> As far as i understood there was no circumstance under which he'd have
> been involved further, at all.

The situation has changed. Notably I have taken up employment where (all 
current plans considered) I will have to maintain at minimum a private 
fork of DBIx::Class for my own use.

In light of several proposals on the list, the gist of my *revised* 
position is:


- If there is sufficient interest in myself continuing to be the sole 
gatekeeper/point of responsibility for the DBIx::Class distribution

   and

- Folks are not concerned with neither my tangibly limited availability 
going forward (I started a 40h/week job), nor with the potential 
conflict of interest (i.e. that I might slip up and put $work concerns 
ahead of the userbase)

   and

- All current comaints are content with relinquishing their claims to 
the namespace and continuing building up on my work outside of the 
DBIx::Class distribution


Then, yes: I suppose you can consider this a proposal to avail myself to 
keeping the preexisting actual setup unchanged for the foreseeable future.


RIBASUSHI