Re: The Nature of PEAR's Greatness

I like many things about PEAR. I think it's maturing nicely, and hopefully will get a few things "figured out" and be a solid source for solid code. I think that criticism will help PEAR grow; I've been very critical, but it's not to be mean to anyone (indeed, I couldn't really say that anyone is at fault for where PEAR is today ... perhaps that's part of the problem). In the end I'd like to see PEAR succeed, of course. I'd like it to be a more welcoming place. I don't get that feeling now, but maybe it's just me. But yes, I like many things about PEAR:

* The installer is great.

The installer is indeed great. I use it for installing Phing and Creole packages and love that ability. I love the PEAR_PackageFileManager class which makes it simple to create the package.xml. I think that the channels feature will be a great addition. I can't wait for channels, frankly, so I can setup my own.

* Coding standards rock!

I think that PEAR standards are good in that they have become a standard reference in PHP. Most projects out there adhere to these. They are too strict for my taste, but the principle of coding standards is very sound. Error_Stack is indeed great. I can't wait to give that a try on my next PHP4 project -- I may never have another PHP4 project, though, if I can help it :) I like a lot of the packages in PEAR. There's some great code in PEAR.

* The peer review and commentary on code has been helpful to me in particular (not necessarily the proposal process per se, but the ongoing back-and-forth of good practice)

I agree here. I like the idea of commentary (when constructive). I love feedback on my code, even (perhaps especially) when critical. I don't like the voting, though. (I know only positive, but I had to qualify that.) Hans