Re: Auth_Enterprise

On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 11:19:47AM -0500, Paul M Jones wrote: > >>Someone (hi PEAR Group! :-) should write something down as to how kind > > > >Err, didnt we just move to the RFC system for this kind of stuff? > > Is this an RFC issue for the developers, or an opportunity for PEAR > Group to state its expectations? You are initiating this as a PEAR > Group man, I assume, and not one of the unwashed. Perhaps I am > mistaken. I think you're mistaken. Lukas noticed that the package hasn't been touch in over a year and send a mail to the lead developer. He copied pear-dev as a courtesy. This was not inteded to be debate fodder. > If as one of the unwashed, may any developer ask that a package be > removed "because it is potentially confusing"? (Yes, this is a devil's > advocate position.) You're just trying to generate an argument. Lukas spelled out his rationalte clearly in his original message: the package hasn't been touched (in PEAR CVS, as least) in nearly 18 months and has never seen a release. In other words, it's stale. If the original author doesn't intend to pick up development again, the package should be removed. > >Among the things PEAR needs to remember again, aside from trust, is > >common sense. I just asked a common sense question to pear dev (and to > >the author directly in case he doesnt read pear dev. > > Common sense is good, but your sense of what is common and mine may > disagree (they do not in this case). Your common sense question, to > me, reveals that PEAR Group expectations, indeed the community > standards, are not spelled out sufficiently in this case. > > Also, this is not an issue of "trust" to me so much as it is a matter > of continuity. If for whatever reason you are unable to perform your > PEAR Group duties, a written set of guidelines and expectations (not > necessarily rules) will help to ensure that things continue in a > similar manner. Persons new to the community will be able to "read in" > and refer to the guidelines so they may appropriately construct their > behavior. I think this can only be good, but maybe that's just me. Apparently, the PEAR Group's new and sole responsibility has become reading and writing lengthy emails on pear-dev concerning its existence. Talk about taking this otherwise simple thread off onto a totally irrelevant and inflammatory tangent... -- Jon Parise (jon@php.net) :: The PHP Project (http://www.php.net/)