in reply to Re: Re: DBI vs DBIx::Recordset vs princepawn vs chromatic
in thread DBI vs DBIx::Recordset vs princepawn vs chromatic
PsychoSpunk, I am not saying that a discussion of the relative merits of two different ways of doing something isn't appropriate. Unfortunately, that is not how the original post appears to my eyes. Though it easily could have been written in such a fasion, instead it appears as a defensive position for an article not published here, against a criticism, also not published here. This kind of defensive posturing is hardly conducive to open minded discussion and more like a pissing match (even if only one party is actually pissing). If princepawn merely wanted to open a discussion about the relative merits of DBIx::Recordset vs. DBI, and evangelize the former, why bring in the excess baggage of the article and criticism in the first place (because, it appears, he didn't come to open a discussion about DBIx::Recordset vs DBI, he came to defend his article -- and his follow-up to chromatic looks like more of the same). I don't know about you, but thus far I haven't seen anything really new here beyond arguments for, and restatements of, the original perl.com article's content. I am glad you find it so fascinating though.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: Re: Re: Re: DBI vs DBIx::Recordset vs princepawn vs chromatic
by PsychoSpunk (Hermit) on Mar 08, 2001 at 04:26 UTC |