RE: [PEAR-DEV] On PEAR quality issues and natural selection

>> The documentation on PEAR itself is difficult to navigate and confusing. >> The documentation assumes too much knowledge of the reader, even of an >> experienced developer. > >Then help. We have very little arm raising in this respect. I'd be delighted to, if I understood it well enough to document it. The creators of this and that widget should be documenting, not the clueless. >> Documentation on documentation is another lacking area of PEAR, there's >> a link to the docbook website, but no explaination of how to write >> the bloody documentation, nor of how to access CVS and place it in CVS. >> You can get a CVS account, but no explaination of how to use it. No >> examples of well formed docbook xml, PHPDcoumentor is good, but its >> not PHPDocumentors job to explain how to add code snippets and tables >> and all that. > >Sorry your attitude sucks. Its not that I am unwilling to write >documentation. I spend alot of time on PEAR. But I can only spend this >much on PEAR. The same applies to alot of developers. Few users have >taken the time to write documentation after getting help on one of the >lists. We have gotten really few contributions, btw the pear-doc team >accepts plain text docs. Man, my attitude doesn't suck. There's no need to get defensive. >> Some policing, code structure guidelines and whatnot are necessary, but >> all the beauracracy isn't. High quality code, certainly, but all the >> childish regulations and whining has got to go. > >Err whining? I guess you are not interested in cooperation so why bother >with joining a community? I mean why not go to phpclasses if all you >want is a place to upload and then compete via survival of the fittest? >I dont get it honestly. I've observed quite a few "flame wars" this is what I'm referring to. >> I also feel the code structuring guidelines should be expanded to include >> the one true brace convention, on all control structures, not just >> functions... this other convention is difficult to read and most >> professionals don't use it (at least none that I've encountered). > >WTF? so now you want more beauracracy? No just fexibility. Though this isn't clear in my message, one or the other- a choice of either. Its a matter of personal taste, my eyes get tired and I find that the one-true brace convention is easier to read. Flexibility is anti-beauracratic. >I am shocked with all of these comments. I am sure there must be ways to >critize PEAR in coherent ways. But it seems you guys are jumping from >one argument to another. There is one theme to all of this: very little >interest in cooperation. This however is an assumption made inside PEAR. > Maybe this is naiv. Critism is where growth starts. I feel you are taking such things personally. My comments come as one new to PEAR. I don't feel that such discussions are non-constructive. If no one points out what everyone else assumes, how does anything get changed? : ) Rich