Re: [Call For Votes] PHP::Fork

Hi! Lukas Smith wrote:

I agree here. While previous mistakes don't make a wrong a right, I think our whole manual lacks any consistent concept of what we really feel needs to happen when and where. Anyways we have a bunch of messes that are a result of the long period of limited peer review, followed by a period of package inflation, followed by the today ruling confusion. I think its time we fix our standards by starting from a clean slate with a PEAR2. There we can think about how to best deal with our developer and users base and how to great the best possible code in a PHP version which actually supports our needs for OOP. PEAR1 should of course be maintained as we all have an interest to keep that code running and to use PEAR1 as a momentum towards a PEAR2 which build on the past experience.

<sarcasm> They say "When a party sucks, you should replace the girls, not the furniture". Where are these brilliant developers that will create wonderful new PEAR2? They are most probably the same people who created the abomination of PEAR1. And they will be governed by the same PEAR Group, well known and respected for their ability to enforce the strict quality standards. </sarcasm> <rant> Here is a bug, submitted a month ago and later changed to Critical status: http://pear.php.net/bugs/bug.php?id=87 It is in the package that has 9 (!) packages depending on it. One of the package's maintainers is a member of PEAR group. Somehow I don't think that PEAR2, PEAR10 or even PEAR666 will help this situation. Having a working QA team will, though. </rant>