NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Dido (Score:1)
I've found that Dido is one of the better "gentle" female artists to play really loud.
Great DB link, BTW. I'm going to have to play with this.
DB note (Score:1)
From looking through the docs, it seems like SQLite supports a 'by-default' incrementing field -- if you specify an integer primary key and don't insert a value for the field, the engine will create one for you. (Not sequential, monotonic, etc., but who cares.) Would this be available in the DB handle after the INSERT in something like $dbh->{sqlite_last_insert_rowid}?
Re:DB note (Score:2)
Dido (Score:2)
-- ask bjoern hansen [askbjoernhansen.com], !try; do();
MySQL & transactions (Score:2)
-- ask bjoern hansen [askbjoernhansen.com], !try; do();
Re:MySQL & transactions (Score:2)
Sometimes you just want something simple. And while MySQL is simple, it's not the simplest. At least not any more
Oh, and some may prefer the license on this (SQLite is public domain, DBD::SQLite is AL/GPL, MySQL is GPL only).
Re:MySQL & transactions (Score:1)
License? (Score:1)
I just downloaded the source for sqlite and I can't find the licensing, except for this bit in main.c:
Call me old-fashioned, but I like real licenses like GPL, BSD or the Artistic. I really don't understand one "disclaims copyright" y
Re:License? (Score:2)
Re:License? (Score:2)
Public domain cannot be public domain without explicitly stating this and he'd better really mean it when he says it as it means he has no rights to it henceforth. CPAN got into a bit of a wicket over this sort of thing so I'm with JJ on this one...tell the guy to get real and either state it is public domain or get a real license. Implied public domain doesn't fly.
Re:License? (Score:1)
Disclaiming copyright is explicitly stating that. There's nothing implied about that. I can't say whether or not it meets a certain legal requirement in its form -- and I am not sure if any of us can; if so, I'd like to know the source, because I am interested -- but it is quite explicit.
Re:License? (Score:1)
Disclaiming copyright is explicitly stating that.
Pudge-daddy, there is a language we speak called English and using the rules of that language, your analysis of the denial of copyright seems cogent. However I raised the issue not because the author's intentions were unclear in English, but they are unclear in the strange Bizzaro language of legalese. In legalese, even the meaning of the word "is" can be argued.
The author is being cute, but I think we'd all be happier with "THIS SOFTWARE IS PUBLIC DOMAIN"
Re:License? (Score:1)
Re:License? (Score:2)
Re:License? (Score:2)
We went around on this with RMS and Brad...you are welcome to talk to them about it but outside the US 'public domain' doesn't mean jack shit...it needs a license and disclaiming a copyright as stupidly as that guy did isn't enough from what I understand. I don't like such things nor am I a lawyer so take it up with the FSF if you care.
Re:License? (Score:1)
Re:License? (Score:2)
Disclaiming copyright is not the same as 'public domain' and since 'public domain' has no meaning outside of the US it is probably not useful.
Re:License? (Score:1)
Re:License? (Score:2)
Public domain must be explicity stated as 'no copyright' is not synonymous with public domain any more than the omission of copyright or license is. It is a legal term whether it interests you or not.
dbi users mailing list (Score:0)
Re:dbi users mailing list (Score:2)
Folky solo female artistes (Score:1)