Re: ITR: dbishell - QA upload
> I was prepared to work with dbishell to aid support of free software in
> Debian but the free software clients have already surpassed what
> dbishell can offer, IMHO.
Maybe you could list those clients, I havn't found anyone else except dbishell.
I would be more than happy to use them instead.
(Those other DBI clients listed on the sourceforge page are not even packaged.)
As for the current bugs in dbishell, there are only three.
#343265 - Seems like oracle is disabling the signals, the same thing
happens when just using DBI in programs. That is more a
DBD issue I think.
#495978 - removing 'use lib' seems trivial
#446834 - the copyright shouldn't be hard to fix
So, what else needs to be done to dbishell to keep it in unstable?
> Sorry, I really don't give two hoots about any non-free stuff -
> especially non-free stuff that is not even distributable *in* Debian
> non-free. Supporting Oracle just isn't something I care about, at least
> until *all* of Oracle is released under the GPLv3 or later. (Like that's
> going to happen.)
Using a free database isn't always an option at work
when connecting to big legacy system. Using DBI is at least a way to
remove database specific calls from the code so the code can be reused
when the database is changed to a free alternative.
And I don't see why dbishell should be connected to Oracle, DBD::Oracle
is just another DBD-module.
Sorry for sounding a bit aggressive, but all programs doesn't have
to be state of the art to be useful. :-)
> I'm certainly not going to maintain it and Sandro has already stated
> that he doesn't have sufficient interest in the package to do the extra
> work required (effectively becoming upstream). Are you going to do it?
Maybe I will.
Reply to: