Re: Package proposal misuse?

Pierre-Alain Joye wrote:

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 10:37:28 +0200 Bertrand Mansion <bmansion@mamasam.com> wrote:

Looks fine, +1 IMO, only $DEVELOPERS having a package in pear already should be allowed to vote because they already have some experience with the whole process, coding standards, package.xml, pear tools, file hierarchy and the like.

Agreed here too. pierre

I *so* strongly disagree in this case. I think that whilst the pear-devs should be the ones who say if a package is fit for PEAR, only the community knows what it wants *IN* PEAR. So perhaps we need to approach this from 2 stand points: A vote by $DEVELOPERS on whether or not the code itself is good And a second vote by $GLOBAL (which includes $DEVELOPERS) on whether or not the package is actually wanted. Only this way can we serve the community as best we can. Obviously, you need to "win" both votes to get in. I think *any* non +1 votes should carry a reason that way $USER can go away and fix his package and then re-apply. I believe that all previous votes should be written off also, so you cannot carry +3 (or potentially -3) forward, people will have to vote again based on the new package proposal alone. - Davey