On Mon, 23 Apr 2012, Justus Winter <4winter at informatik.uni-hamburg.de> wrote: > Quoting Felipe Contreras (2012-04-23 14:36:33) >> I don't think this is the right approach. If database_destroy truly >> destroys the object, then we would want to do it only at garbage >> collection, when it's not accessible any more. What if I want to >> re-use the database from the Ruby code? >> >> This would probably be better: >> >>[...] > > You're probably right, I don't know the ruby bindings at all, I just > wanted to preserve the old behavior. You are welcome to refine the > ruby bindings later (or maintain them, I *believe* they are > unmaintained, the last change was back in october 2011), but let's get > this patch series in first.
I just marked this series ready, but I wasn't clear on what the conclusion here was. Feel free to mark it moreinfo again if it's not actually ready (maybe mark just this patch? it's a bit confusing since the patches aren't quite all together.)
