Hi, I will only refer to complain on the slow SOCI release schedule. So, instead of deciding to join an existing project, which N.B. you have used with some degree of success, and help to speed its release process, help with fixing bugs and propose to add features
you are missing, you decide to fork it, tweak it and release it.
CppDB is not a fork of SOCI, it is totally different library that does things very differently that does not share a single line of code with SOCI. I admit that I had took many general ideas from SOCI and made them more suitable for my vision how SQL library should look, and this is very logical since SOCI was the best SQL library I used so far (till CppDB was released :-) ). And as you know (and you are as you on soci's mailing list) that I still do my small contributions to SOCI - each time I find some issue I try to fix it, report it and even send a patch. As FOSS project developer and leader I know how valuable it is. Now I'll explain the decision more deeply: ------------------------------------------ I was considering join the SOCI project and bring some improvements, however my vision of how the stuff should work and SOCI's vision was quite different, and the internal structure of the SOCI project and class relationships did bringing new and significant features to SOCI was not as simple as I was thinking. So basically I had two options: 1. Fork SOCI and rewrite it - very bad idea, for several reasons: a. forking is bad! b. it still requires from me rewriting its internals c. I'm still not pleased with imlementation level of SOCI's sqlite3 and mysql backends. 2. Push new things to SOCI fighting to explain my vision of things, missing some of them and finally not getting what I need. 3. Create my own library that provides the vision I need. So I had chousen the 3rd. However I had **another** reason to do this as well. As you probably know I'm developer of CppCMS framework, and I need a good database connectivity solution for my customers, and what is most important I need it to be stable, useable with fast upstream bug fixes, optimized for performance and I need it **now**. SOCI couldn't do this for me, as it is still stuck in version 3.0.0 released in 2008 with no bug fixes. And I can't say to my customers - take a git version of SOCI it is very nice (that 9 hours ago was broken and probably still broken now - I've send a patch to SOCI's list) So beleive me I do like soci, I think it is great project but, it does not suit my and my customers needs. And for the last record, I still mention SOCI as one of the libraries that can be sucessefully used with CppCMS: http://art-blog.no-ip.info/wikipp/en/page/sql_connectivity
This is not how FOSS works to make a project healthy and sustainale in long term. Your observable disappointment about
software here makes me asking, what's next? Boost libraries forked?
Anyways, I'm just disappointed how much FOSS is ego-driven where it should mean collaboration. Just pity.
Mateusz, as I explained above it is not about the ego, even thou there are many things I can be proud of. It is about having a solution. Beleive me I prefer spending my time of fixing bugs and providing new features in CppCMS then writing an SQL library. Best Regards and I hope your undersand the resasons I had. Artyom