RE: [PEAR-DEV] Template Proposal
| From: | Graeme Merrall | Date: | Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:52:50 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PEAR-DEV] Template Proposal | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-2769@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
[after much skimming]
> > I think the CORE and EXT difference would be that CORE would be
> > distributed/maintained/etc. by PEAR developers, while EXT would be a
> > distribution situation only. So you control your code, and you commit
> > your code, and PEAR provides an automated distribution mechanism.
>
> 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?
>
I'm working on a class at the mo which wi hope will go into core - if that's
what it ends up being called.
I don't think the fact that you're a pear developer should make you any
better when it comes to getting scripts into core. It's just that these guys
know PEAR a lot more and they've been around longer and their scripts are
more mature.
Perhaps (spaces/tabs aside) that since we have the coding guide already no
matter how tough it is that we try and stick to something like it for core.
Personally I quite like the coding standards :)
That means that people who would like to see their code in core or would
like to have their code considered for inclusion in core, *must* adhere to
the PEAR standards for coding, errors, API etc. If you're that keen or good
then it shouldn't be a problem anyway right? If you just want to have your
script distributed then just write it how you like and put in in ext.
That way when people say "I want my script in core, put it in core!", we can
turn around and say "Did you follow the guidelines for consideration of
placing a script on core?". Of course then there needs to be some
democratic process of deciding by what merits a script makes it into core
but that's a whole other thread. Although IMHO one rule should be "If the
script's not release quality rockin, don't come a knockin'"! Translation:
stable API and non-beta :)
Cheers,
Graeme