Re: Template Proposal

Quoting jim winstead <jimw@apache.org>: > what makes the 'pear developers' so special that we hang a 'core' label > on their packages, and not on someone else's? what if i were to develop > the best frobnicating class ever, and now most of the other packages in > pear that frobnicate things start to depend on my class. do i have to > give up control of my frobnicating class because some group of 'pear > developers' votes to move my class into the core? Jim, no one is going to twist your arm and say you have to move your class's source control, whatever, into PEAR because people want to use it. But the idea is that for people who want some kind of a standard core library, that stuff should be in a central place and under peer review. Not some special, mysterious label of 'pear developers'. It should be consistent. There are people who _do_ want to submit code to such things. If you don't want any of your code in it, well, then it won't be. Put it in the CPAN-like repository instead. Hell, put copies of everything in the core library into the CPAN repository too, with different names (I think having a unique name is about the only criteria that should span both repositories), tweaked the way you want them. Don't use the core libraries; pretend they don't exist. Your choice, and I'm not going to - and I'm not interested in - convincing you that you are wrong. But it's a difference of opinion that isn't really worth debating, assuming we provide the infrastructure for both sides. It'll always be there, and the A people are never going to convince the B people, and vice versa. Trying is just wasting all of our time. -chuck -- Charles Hagenbuch, <chuck@horde.org> "What was and what may be, lie, like children whose faces we cannot see, in the arms of silence. All we ever have is here, now." - Ursula K. Le Guin