Re: PEAR_ErrorStack Quality

Are we going to underscore all good packages with PEAR_ then? Sorry, but I think this is highly stupid. "Greg Beaver" <cellog@php.net> wrote in message news:40E82270.9090404@php.net... > Aidan Lister wrote: > > > If you plan on making it a separate package, why would it still be > > "Pear_ErrorStack"? > > > > I'd love to use ErrorStack like I use any other package (in non pear > > projects), but I feel most other developers would not, as I would, because > > it sounds like a PEAR internal class. > > There may be an initial time period where people are put off by the > name, but word of mouth will correct that (and seeing it in action), > just as any good program has found in the past. Plus it might help to > remedy the PEAR stigma that already exists. > > Basically, I don't mind if a high quality package has "PEAR" in its > name, only if a low-quality one does. So, if PEAR_ErrorStack has flaws > in the code, I want to know about it. If it doesn't, then tell your > friends about it. > > Greg