RE: [PEAR-DEV] The Nature of PEAR's Greatness

Tell the list, what do you think is great about PEAR? * The installer is great. COMMENT: It's fine when it works. The problem is that is simply does not work on many common setups. In a way that's not so bad if we assume that using PEAR classes is only for the serious developer. Casual developers need not apply. * Coding standards rock! COMMENT: Not sure about rock but the standards are ok. * Naming conventions rock! COMMENT: Not sure about rock but the conventions are ok. * I like the idea of a common error handling scheme. COMMENT: This is something I really dislike. I am hoping that in PHP5 we can simply raise errors and not even require the Error_Stack class. Let the app developer decide on the error processing. * The categorization of classes, while it might use some work, is very helpful. COMMENT: Ok * The structure of classes (tests/, docs/, etc) is very useful COMMENT: Ok * 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) COMMENT: Ok and often amusing. ... I'm sure there's more, let me think about it ... -- Paul M. Jones Savant: the simple alternative to Smarty. http://phpsavant.com/ -- PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php