Christian Cryder wrote:
[...]
> Does that help explain where I'm coming from here?
Sure, I understand exactly where you're coming from.
If you want a stable, unchanging, tested-for-your-application driver, I
suggest you import from whatever spot in CVS serves your needs and
maintain it yourself. You can selectively backpatch bugfixes from the
official driver as needed. (this is exactly what Open Cloud does for our
product, BTW, it's just that because I also hack on the official driver
the changes aren't usually all that big -- any fixes we need I try to
push back into the official driver)
I don't really want to see the official driver become even more of a
maze of twisty little backwards-compatibility hacks than it already is..
> whether its just "our way or the highway".
I don't mean it to come across like that. The problem is that it's
likely that any particular change in the driver is going to affect
someone out there adversely.. trying to carefully work around this in
every case seems like a recipe for paralysis. We have perhaps 1/4 of a
developer working on the driver between myself, Kris, and Dave, so we
really don't have tons of development time spare :/ And when a
complete CVS history is there for the taking.. it's not like we're
forcing you to use a particular version.
If you think there's something the driver should be doing that it
doesn't (say, a URL option to control this Short vs Integer behaviour),
the fastest way to get it done is to submit a good patch..
-O
