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

[Renvoize, Martin]

+1 from me too, well expressed Matt.

I also wanted to add that it really feels to me like people are only
focused on the negatives of a split. Reduced resources.  That simply isn't
the case here, we're left with a solid dbic with a commitment from riba to
continue supporting it, all be with a reduction in hours.  We then have a
second project with the new found freedom to break api's and trial new
features with a group of excited coders wanting to jump in.

Martin

On 26 Oct 2016 9:20 p.m., "Charlie Garrison" <garrison at zeta.org.au> wrote:

> Good morning,
>
> On 27 Oct 2016, at 0:50, Matthew Phillips wrote:
>
> So, given a choice between a proven quantity, and an unproven (and in Frew
>> and I's opinion almost  non-existent) quantity, it seems like the obvious
>> choice for Peter to continue. The gratitude expressed for Peter's immense
>> amount of work over the past few years from the users (and me) during these
>> past few weeks points to this.
>>
>
> Thanks Matt. That’s what I’ve been thinking during this conversation but
> wasn’t sure how to express it.
>
> +1 Peter
>
> Charlie
> --
>
>    Charlie Garrison  <garrison at zeta.org.au>
>    github.com/cngarrison   metacpan.org/author/CNG
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
> IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
> SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
> Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/
> dbix-class at lists.scsys.co.uk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/attachments/20161027/b48dd8c4/attachment.htm>