On 06/23/10 17:39, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 04:18:27PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote:
Of course, another way could be to extract the SQL-engine interface
from DBD::File into a DBI::DBD::SqlEngine and DBD::AnyData uses that
without caring of DBD::File (for some time until we could do better).
That's why I ask: would it be very bad when DBI-1.612 would break
DBD::AnyData for a limited amount of month (3-5) or should I (we?)
investigate more effort to get a clean, running AnyData and
DBD::AnyData out there with DBI-1.612?
Rather than trying to get a "clean" DBD::AnyData, how about we aim for a
"dirty" one instead?
DBD::AnyData says "use base qw( DBD::File );". The DBD::File that
shipped with DBI 1.611 could be copied into the DBD::AnyData distro
and renamed to DBD::AnyOldFile (and hacked internally to match).
Then DBD::AnyData could say "use base qw( DBD::AnyOldFile );"
Not pretty, or clean, but possibly the basis of a workable solution?
DBD::AnyData
(https://svn.perl.org/modules/DBD-AnyData/branches/0.1x-SqlEngine) passes
all tests with DBI-trunk and SQL-Statement-trunk.
Thanks so far.
Jens
