Re: [PEPr] Proposal for Structures::Structures_Graph

<stefan@neufeind.net> wrote : > On 3 Feb 2004 at 19:56, PEPr wrote: > >> Sérgio Carvalho (http://pear.php.net/user/sergiosgc) proposes the new >> package Structures::Structures_Graph. >> >> You can find more detailed information here: >> http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=20 > > Hmm, I'm currently think about what the class will be named that > renders such "graphs" into images. Image_Graph is already "taken". > And I don't think we should integrate functions for drawing those and > maybe similar "graphs" that might come in the future. They don't have > nothing in common with what Image_Graph currently does (will do when > v0.2 is out). On the other hand: If Image_Graph might allow drawing > of pie-graphs some day we will also need different functionality > because there will be no "axes" etc. needed anymore. > > What do you (pear-dev-colleagues) think? Want my opinion ? Well, I just noticed that when it is someone else (meaning not you) who is involved in a proposal, you tend to suggest very often that the proposed package should be integrated into another one that already exists. For an example, see Mail_Imap... Now, when you are the closest target to a package proposal (Image_Graph vs Structure_Graph) you start by saying both packages should not be integrated... So my opinion is that your behavior is a little unfair and next time you suggest two packages should be integrated, think twice because it might happen to you as well ! Bertrand Mansion Mamasam