Re: DBD::Informix and comp.databases.informix

From: Jonathan Leffler <jleffler@informix.com> > >Dear Informix User, > >I've been justifiably chastised for being very grumpy when people post >questions about DBD::Informix to comp.databases.informix -- I do get >grumpy when people do that. > >There are two documented support channels for DBD::Informix: > >* a high-volume public mailing list, dbi-users@isc.org, which has a > small volume of Informix traffic and hence a low S/N ratio. >* a low-volume private mailing list, dbd-informix@informix.com, > specifically to the Informix support effort (aka me). You won't be > subscribed to this list, but you can use it to communicate problems. > >Given these alternatives, is it fair for me to complain when the >unknowing send questions to a plausible alternative (high-volume) news >group / mailing list, namely comp.databases.informix? Put another way, IMHO, yes, it is fair for you to complain. >would the Informix community as a whole benefit from having >DBD::Informix questions answered on c.d.i? Hm, tough call. It might inspire more of us to take up Perl if we had some idea of what it could do... :-) I personally quite like the idea of a one-stop shop for all Informix support, but that's just me. >Also (and semi-relevantly to another thread started by another obnoxious >question answerer), is it fair to point out RTFM to people asking >questions where the answer is in TFM? Gee, I don't know. I do think that if something is *IN THE BLOODY INDEX* then it's fair game to tell people to get off their asses. I don't mind if someone doesn't understand something in the manual, but I do object to questions which clearly indicate that the spine of the manual is metaphorically uncracked. >More complexly, I've just come across a new class of user for >DBD::Informix. Up until now, people who were using DBD::Informix had >also installed it, or they had easy access to the source code. Now I'm >finding that there as some (potential) users who do not install >DBD::Informix themselves, and hence do not have easy access to the >source code. Since some of the documentation is not installed with the >product (mainly because it only applies to a few circumstances), what >about people who RTFM but do not read the correct TFM because they do >not have direct access to the uninstalled documentation. Of course, all >such users can get the source code (and it's the simple cop-out for me), >but... Keep the cop-out -- at a guess you're going to be busy enough. :-) >Your thoughts, please - publicly or privately. I quite like the idea of merging your DBD::Informix support with cdi, but like I said, that's just me. >Mostly, c.d.i has an acceptable S/N ration, but it is >trending downwards, which is bad. OK, I'll leave then. ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 21:51:58 BST, Obnoxio The Clown Wrote: > > From: Jonathan Leffler <jleffler@informix.com> > >>would the Informix community as a whole benefit from having >>DBD::Informix questions answered on c.d.i? > > Hm, tough call. It might inspire more of us to take up Perl if we had some > idea of what it could do... :-) > Well if you want I'll answer every question that might otherwise garner a 4GL or SPL answer in Perl ;-} /J\\