Re: Package proposal misuse?
| From: | Davey | Date: | Tue, 12 Aug 2003 19:59:05 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Package proposal misuse? | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-19588@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Lukas Smith wrote:
Ding ding ding! Lukas hits the nail on the head - DaveyFrom: Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:ilia@prohost.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 9:36 PMOn August 12, 2003 03:03 pm, Davey wrote:pear-devsI *so* strongly disagree in this case. I think that whilst theapproachshould 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 toAnotherthis from 2 stand points:I've said it before and I'll say it again. PEAR is not YASA (YetScript Archive). It is a repository of libraries that are useful to majority(!!) of PHP users and are stable/functional/secure enough tobeassociated with PHP as a project. It is my opinion that given thenumberof people who fall into the $DEVELOPERS category, there is more thenenoughopinions & points of view to determine the merits of package exclusionorinclusion. Inviting anyone from the street to make such decisions is abadidea. You would have no reflection on the person level of competence, which you could determine about a $DEVELOPER by looking at their code andpriorcommunication(s) to the list. You also have no guarantee that people voting are in fact distinct users, a person with multiple e-mail addresses,ipscould easily trick the system. A compromise of sorts would be to allow anyone to comment on thepackage.Which may bring up previously unconsidered benefits and downsides of a particular package. However, the final vote of the merits of thepackageshould be up to $DEVELOPERS and $GROUP (PEAR Group).Indeed this idea was kicked around before. Everybody can vote, but only developer's count. However a large number of votes from the other users should encourage more developers to consider the package.Personally, I'd be much happier if package acceptance decisions were $GROUP only, but that's probably impractical.The purpose of the PEAR group is more about general direction, standards development and conflict resolution. Regards, Lukas