Re: Re: new template engine

> accept everything, Pear will become something like hotscripts and > believe me this will kill Pear. I think that there are thousands scripts ACK > forks _inside Pear_ will be evil for both users and Pear developers. If > someone ask me, "what provides Pear?" and I answer "Pear provides 3 > abstraction layers, 8 template systems, 3 documentation methods, ...", > he probably will think that Pear is at least silly (including me in > helping that mess to grow ;). I'm friend of improving, enhancing or even > replacing but not of duplicating. We should create a standard process for commiting such new classes. Starting with questionnaire like this: 1. Is there already a class, that provides the functionality? yes/no 2. Is it possible to transform the your API to the existing API? yes/partly/no 3. If your answer was 'partly' or 'no', are the new methods caused by: i. better handling of the stuff and/or ii. my class more can make 4. If you answer is 'i.' in 3., your class is * faster * more simply * saves memory * _______________ 5. If you answer is 'ii.' in 3., why is it not possible to extend the existing implementation? ___________________________________________________ Depending of the answers we better can decide to introduce competitive classes and perhaps start a RFC.