Re: Next patch for SQL::Statement

Hi Jens,

Thank you for all the work you have put in to SQL::Statement, it sounds
like great work. I have known for a long time that the joins could be
improved and I'm glad that you did it. I'm unfortunately at a very
busy time personally - with two major site launches coming up this month
and next so I have almost no time to keep up with working on my
modules. I'd like to include your patches and make a CPAN release as
quickly as I can. Realistically it may be several weeks before I have
time to do any real testing. To get some feedback quicker, I think what
I will do is put the new version on perl.svn.org and then tell people on
the DBI list and perlmonks (which may actually get more feedback) to try
out your changes by downloading the SVN version. Then I will test when
I can and presumably move the SVN version to CPAN. Does that sound like
a good way to proceed?

Just to check - If I patch 1.15 with your three patches, will I then end
up with the version you have been using and testing?

I will want to thank you formally in the changes file when I make the
release so please let me know how you would like the credits listed - if
there are several people involved, if your company should or should not
be credited, if you want your email listed, etc.

Thanks again for all the work.

--
Jeff

jens.rehsack@bayerbbs.com wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> as I wrote you last time, we were a little bit unhappy with the method
> join2tables(). Finally we looked over it a little and in our environment
> it was possible to rewite the function as added in the patch.
> Because of we didn't really understand what NATURAL joins are, we couldn't
> test all situations the function theoretically could handle. But the
> current version we tested here over 3-4 weeks and it seems to be stable
> and fully functional (for our requirements).
>
> I would be glad if you'll find the time to look over it and before
> everyone may find it via Google in the perl-dbi mailing list (I googled
> before writing the patch on my onw ;-)) so duplicate work may avoided.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Jens Rehsack
>
>

Antwort: Re: Next patch for SQL::Statement

Hi Jeff,

thanks for your quick response. I thought you were busy, that's why I=20
always included the DBI-list so bots can index it and everyone can find=20
the patch.
I don't patch separately - the patches are cumulative, so it's enough to=20
apply the last patch.

The way using a -CURRENT version from svn sound to a freebie like me=20
absolutely perfect.
The guys who worked on the improvement were my collegue=20
detlef.wartke@bayerbbs.com (office) and me (both: private and office). If=20
you really want to put me in the credits, please use jens@rehsack.de - I=20
don't use my mail-server for the moment but if you give me several weeks=20
to fix it, I'll get it up and running before christmas ;)

Freundliche Grüße / Best Regards

Jens Rehsack
____________________ ____=5F=
________________

Fa. Manß & Partner
Phone: +49 - 214 - 30 - 46 193
Fax: +49 - 214 - 30 - 31 625
E-mail: jens.rehsack@bayerbbs.com
Web: http://www.BayerBBS.com

Geschäftsführung: Vorsitzender Andreas Resch | Arbeitsdirektor Norb=
ert=20
Fieseler
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Klaus Kühn
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Leverkusen | Amtsgericht Köln, HRB 49895




Jeff Zucker =20
12.10.2007 10:01

An
jens.rehsack@bayerbbs.com
Kopie
Jeff Zucker , detlef.wartke@bayerbbs.com,=20
oliver.fenker@bayerbbs.com, dbi-users@perl.org,=20
michael.steinheuer.ms@bayerbbs.com
Thema
Re: Next patch for SQL::Statement






Hi Jens,

Thank you for all the work you have put in to SQL::Statement, it sounds=20
like great work. I have known for a long time that the joins could be=20
improved and I'm glad that you did it. I'm unfortunately at a very=20
busy time personally - with two major site launches coming up this month=20
and next so I have almost no time to keep up with working on my=20
modules. I'd like to include your patches and make a CPAN release as=20
quickly as I can. Realistically it may be several weeks before I have=20
time to do any real testing. To get some feedback quicker, I think what=20
I will do is put the new version on perl.svn.org and then tell people on=20
the DBI list and perlmonks (which may actually get more feedback) to try=20
out your changes by downloading the SVN version. Then I will test when=20
I can and presumably move the SVN version to CPAN. Does that sound like=20
a good way to proceed?=20

Just to check - If I patch 1.15 with your three patches, will I then end=20
up with the version you have been using and testing?

I will want to thank you formally in the changes file when I make the=20
release so please let me know how you would like the credits listed - if=20
there are several people involved, if your company should or should not=20
be credited, if you want your email listed, etc.

Thanks again for all the work.

--=20
Jeff

jens.rehsack@bayerbbs.com wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> as I wrote you last time, we were a little bit unhappy with the method=20
> join2tables(). Finally we looked over it a little and in our environment =


> it was possible to rewite the function as added in the patch.
> Because of we didn't really understand what NATURAL joins are, we=20
couldn't=20
> test all situations the function theoretically could handle. But the=20
> current version we tested here over 3-4 weeks and it seems to be stable=20
> and fully functional (for our requirements).
>
> I would be glad if you'll find the time to look over it and before=20
> everyone may find it via Google in the perl-dbi mailing list (I googled=20
> before writing the patch on my onw ;-)) so duplicate work may avoided.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Jens Rehsack
>
>=20