On 02.02.2008 01:10, Adam Maccabee Trachtenberg wrote: > We change the rules all the time to fit the needs of PHP.
Do we? > This may not be one of those times, or this may not be the way to go, but I > think > the concept of having better support from database companies is one > that at least deserves the benefit of a dialog. Sure, that's what the "dialog" is - they asked if they could set their own rules and we said "no". That's what the discussion is - they've asked a question and got an answer. We've discussed it long enough to be sure, and the answer is "NO". > Furthermore, I think Marcus has contributed enough to PHP that he does > not deserve to hear that what would be good for PHP is for him to "go > away." Wait a second... "Somebody has contributed enough, so everybody should agree with him"? Do I get it right? I do respect Marcus (as well as everybody else, doesn't matter how big his/her contribution is), but this doesn't matter I agree. And I really do think that such an attempt to add a half-closed-source module into PHP project MUST be rejected, as it violates all the rules and basically sets a new rule: everybody can do anything he/she wants to do for no reason. > PDO opinions aside, I don't think any of us would actually > think that would put PHP in a more healthy situation. Openness is healthy. Adding new rules to make lawyers happy is not. -- Wbr, Antony Dovgal -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
