Re: [gnome-db] proposing libgda/libgnomedb as part of the GNOME platform

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

I am concerned that some of the new API is not implemented by all
providers and might never be (such as the changing of field
definitions). If that will be normal then we might need some way to
discover provider capabilities. Actually, I know I suggested that API in
the first place, but I don't think it's a good idea now. I think that
converting the data in the fields is time-intensive and lossy even if it
a can be done. 

I am also concerned that some provider behaviour might always be
dependent on the backend. For instance, the postgres provider can not
report whether a field is a primary key or whether it auto-increments.

I am also starting to think that there might still be some const
problems in the API. I will try to remove all the warnings (there are
far too many) from libgda and maybe that will tell me more.

More importantly, there will be some resistance to putting libgda in the
Platform before it has been used by an application in the Desktop. And
when a Desktop application uses it, we prefer to see the library live in
the Desktop for at least one cycle. But it's worth suggesting anyway,
because it is unreasonable to expect a platform to also justify itself
by providing the applications that use the platform.  

On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 13:03 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have been thinking for a long time about maybe proposing libgda and
> libgnomedb as part of the GNOME developer platform.
> 
> This will involve us following GNOME release schedules (1 every 6
> months) and commit to the UI, string and code freezes at the same time
> than the rest of GNOME modules. This will put on us a bit more pressure,
> since we'll have to be a bit more strict on how and when we do the
> releases, and when we add new features, etc.
> 
> On the other side, it will give us much more visibility, and will allow
> many of the GNOME apps that use those libraries to have that support
> compiled in always in a default GNOME setup. It will allow also to
> propose at a later time applications like Mergeant, Glom, etc
> 
> So, what do people think? Should we go ahead and propose it for
> inclusion, or just continue to be a part of GNOME Office and ship only
> with that?
> 
> cheers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-db-list mailing list
> gnome-db-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list
-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com