Re: Merging DBD::RAM into DBI

I question this proposal.

Does DBI currently have any useful drivers bundled, such that you could install 
just DBI and use it effectively for real work without installing any other 
drivers?  (I consider Proxy a special case, and even with it in use, the same 
question applies to whatever other DBI install is being proxied.  And the other 
bundled driver-named classes seem to be more base classes than complete drivers.)

I think it would be better for DBI to stick to defining an interface, and any 
implementations/drivers should be distributed separately.

The only good exception I can think of is a driver bundled in order to bootstrap 
a more comprehensive DBI test suite that tests doing it for real, eg fetching or 
modifying of data, whatever the API defines rather than mocking.  That ideally 
can then be reused with other DBI drivers.

So, I would only support bundling such a RAM-based DBMS if the DBI test suite 
exploits this in its test suite to help test the DBI interface itself.

-- Darren Duncan

Jens Rehsack wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'd like to merge DBD::RAM into DBI for several reasons:
> 
> 1) It's a tiny one without much dependencies, it should run fine
>    with just DBI::Sql::Nano (or should)
> 
> 2) I had an evil idea how to allow Pure-Perl drivers can work
>    together in one instance like:
> 
>      DBI->connect( "dbi:DBM:", , , {
>        sql_join_drv => "DBD::RAM", ... } );
> 
>    But there is something for testing required ;)
> 
> 3) It currently doesn't get some love, even if it should get.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> Cheers