Re: WG: [PEAR-DEV] [Call for Votes] XML_Statistics

Hi! Stan Lemon wrote:

Exscuse my bitching and let me intervene for a second... The point I'm trying to make is that contributing a package should require sufficient documentation, it should not be a step which is taken later, regardless of the developers reputation.

Inline documentation for the package in question is IMO sufficient.

As for those of us who are bitching about PEAR's pathetic exscuse for documentation, we would contribute if we could count on it being included. Remember, PEAR's other fault is that it doesn't pay attention to use submitted patches and so forth, thus there is a pluthra of patching which has never been done, some of which includes doc add-ons. I wanted access to get to HTML_BBCodeParser to patch some items and improve docs. Has anyone ever even aknowledged that inquiry? No.

You should have contacted package developers. If they are still maintaining then *they* should apply the patches, if they are not then ask them to make *you* a maintainer. Example of this approach: I recently took over the maintainership of HTML_Menu. Of course, the package developers may be completely unavailable and there are no fixed rules for this case. Then again, why don't you contribute your skills and time to coding a bug and patch tracking system? P.S. The amount of words you've writen in this thread would be sufficient for a medium-sized tutorial. Consider this.