RE: [PEAR-DEV] future of PEAR (was [PEAR-DEV] [Call For Votes] PHP::Fork)

> From: Alexey Borzov [mailto:borz_off@cs.msu.su] > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 9:36 PM > Lukas Smith wrote: > > I see a clean slate as a place where we can redefine our community > process. > > The fact that there is a PHP5, which addresses a lot of the limitations > of > > PHP which we have to live with currently, is just another reason on top. > > What exactly prevents adding this "community process" or whatever to the > current > PEAR? > > <example> > Problem: there are packages in PEAR that have "stable" status but lack any > kind > of documentation. > > Solution: set a (reasonable) deadline, after which all "stable" packages > not > having documentation will be automatically demoted to "beta". Explicitly > forbid > marking the package stable if it does not have documentation. Add an > automatic > check for package upload. Do NOT add a clause that packages being > maintained by > Very Important Developers will not be demoted / will be allowed to be > stable > without having docs. > </example> > > Current problem, as I see it is that all rules / regulations / peer review > end > with package being accepted. After that the developer may do whatever he > sees > fit. There is no procedure to change the maintainer. There is no procedure > to > add a temporary maintainer. There is no procedure to make a bugfixing > release > for a showstopper bug. Of course this could be done in the current PEAR. However this is more difficult and also a bit problematic. Even though this is Opensource there is an implicit contract between all parties. Changing the rules too much feels problematic too me. While creating a new "version" of PEAR seems like a totally valid thing to do. Anyways I am also not sure if you can define a community process properly this late in the game. Regards, Lukas