Re: Net_Server package removed...
| From: | Davey | Date: | Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:41:16 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Net_Server package removed... | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-20963@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Stephan Schmidt wrote:
Hi, 5 Minutes ago I visited the PEAR website and have seen that you have removed my package Net_Server without discussing the topic or informing me about it. Tomas posted a comment last week that he did not like the class and he votes for it to be removed. I wanted to talk to him about how we could improve the class so it fits not only his needs but also mine but I received no answer. Today I put some effort into Net_Server to adjust it so it could several concurrent requests at once by forking new processes. I even posted a question on how the best design could be to pear-dev. Now, I have finished a new version of Net_Server which provides a factory, that lets you create servers that handle all requests in one package as well as servers that handle requests independently. I think both methods have advantages as well as disadvantages. The project is ready to be released as a alpha version, it is working and it does what Tomas wants a server class to do. I can say that I'm really disappointed about how you guys in the PEAR group treat the developers. I was willing to address (and already have fixed) the issues Tomas had with my class (btw. he was the only person who complained), but if you prefer just to remove a work-in-progress instead of talking to each other or working together, fine. I hope that you now can see that it was a mistake to remove the class, as it can be perfectly used for all servers and let me include this package again and next time I'd prefer a discussion instead of just removing packages. If you'd like to see the sourcecode of the class I can make it available this evening. Of course the same applies to HTTP_Server, which is based on Net_Server. Future versions will be using the forking server which allow concurrent requests. Best regards, StephanIf this has indeed happened I will be very sad that it has. However I would rather assume for now that it was lost in the server move. PEAR Group comments on this (publicly!) will be sought after, and pretty quickly, so I would not pussyfoot around. - Davey