Newsgroups: php.internals,php.pdo
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:35134 php.pdo:110
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.198.186 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=fsyGuORjBYKwjMceew1YLisC8ksdwVU8nOLh+xy5wB131jr/bFfMlMIAwTXhhSYatQsY7DQFm8wNihHLxwbU86HqKdUYZV/2YjtMkjCvkjV9KtalweGXOnrw3HzkH6Rycu6XMn5wQlSh3NLIjkrIgue3XYGighrL0rJEIHBqZGo=
Message-ID: <fe05d1540802030547p46a53a68hb0c5e79573d025ae@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 14:47:38 +0100
To: "Marcus Boerger" <helly@php.net>
Cc: "Markus Fischer" <markus@fischer.name>, pdo@lists.php.net, 
	internals <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <304490699.20080203115352@marcus-boerger.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <00ce01c865c2$22f23aa0$c6fc1f3e@foxbox>
	 <510220265.20080202204406@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <019c01c865d5$2ebbacf0$c6fc1f3e@foxbox>
	 <fe05d1540802021233n14dca604s413a750b9a52d0a7@mail.gmail.com>
	 <155955105.20080203001830@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <fe05d1540802021551l704ac0d9k435772b69da50295@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1497821512.20080203014611@marcus-boerger.de>
	 <47A575A9.7060903@fischer.name>
	 <304490699.20080203115352@marcus-boerger.de>
Subject: Re: An Idea for PDO 2
From: pierre.php@gmail.com ("Pierre Joye")

Hi Markus,

On Feb 3, 2008 11:53 AM, Marcus Boerger <helly@php.net> wrote:
> Hello Markus,
>
>   none of what you said is what I wrote. If you knew me than you would know
> that I would never go this route. In fact I have always been open for
> discussions.

That's new.

> However in this particular case we are speaking about absolute
> blockage.

Please re read my posts. Answer the questions, then a discussion may
begin. For now, there is nothing new since the very first posts
outside you changing your mind.

> He is not willing to even discuss but rather shuts down any
> ongoing effort to make progress. Ok, you can be against all our ideas in any
> form

When you were bashing IBM about their ODBC contribution to PECL on
IRC, I was helping them to package and release their softwares via
PECL. So stop to spread FUDs about me or what I do, and from now on.
Not that what you may think about me or not matters, but every reader
here does not know all the backgrounds behind you or me. If you have
griefs, feel free to mail me them (all at once) or tell them to me
directly when you come around here, even in German if it is easier.

> but you have to understand what and why we discuss and since noone owns
> PHP as a single person no single person has the right to decide. So all we
> can do is participating in discussions and finding workable solutions. If
> someone is not willing to do so then all we can do is count the vote and
> respect it. But it is not acceptable to continously trying to prevent any
> ongoing efforts.

I do not continuously prevent ongoing effort. I'm more prudent than
you when it comes to such decisions. What I asked should have been
answered or even better, I would not have to ask such obvious
questions if this request was done in a respectful manner.

I see no point to discuss solutions for some unknown entities willing
to contribute  when they do not consider to introduce themselves. When
they don't explain clearly why we should do the move and what will be
the actual gains for us (read: for "us" not for them). Until a step in
this/our direction is not done, I will not see a point to think about
solutions as it means they don't really care about us but Zend and
associates (as they seem to communicate only with them as far as I
understand).

Cheers,
-- 
Pierre
http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org