Re: About the package proposal interface

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003, Bertrand Mansion wrote: > With the recent proposal and the release of Stream_Var, it became evident to > me that a minimum time for voting is necessary before the developer is > allowed to add his work on PEAR. What about atleast a week? Doing it in a weekend like was done now seemed totally out of decency to me. I also know that quite a lot of people wanted to cast their (-1) vote on this. > The whole voting session for Stream_Var took one afternoon, that's not > enough if you really want to review the code and not only vote for the idea > like some did (see the mail archive). > > Also, when people like Wez and Derick vote -1, I think it might be useful to > take a bit more time before committing the package. I am not sure those -1 > were counted in the final count. Although I did not put "-1" formally into my mail, I'll do so now :) (An Wez put -0 there, and not -1). The problem that I see is that a lot of people vote +1 for either the idea, or because they-might-sometime-need-this-feature too. I think that's wrong. IMO packages should be useful for a large group of people before put into PEAR. So the question should be "Is this package useful for a large group of people?" instead of the current "Is this package cool or might it sometime be useful to me?". Think outside yourself people... Derick -- "Interpreting what the GPL actually means is a job best left to those that read the future by examining animal entrails." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Derick Rethans http://derickrethans.nl/ International PHP Magazine http://php-mag.net/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------