Re: About IDNA and similar issues...

Justin Patrin wrote:

Makes sense to me. If we do use the draft proposals for this (and why not, it makes sense), then we should encourage developers to create a draft when they start on a project, or even when they have an idea for one. Perhaps if a person has an idea and no time, they could hand the idea off to another interested party? How long does a draft have before it will "time out"?

What about 14 days, for providing examples and/or first sources (pseudo code, proof of concept or the like) for developers which volunteer to provide code their self, and a 30-day "discussion and decission" phase for those people just wanted to contribute ideas and i.e. basic concepts for a package to look whether there's someone "hunting" for the same thing. If that initial phase elapses, the draft could be dropped. Maybe a "history" in a special section on the PEAR website would be very usefull for those people finding each other after a longer period of time. So we'd have no "ghost" drafts or proposals, "older" ideas are not lost and developers are able to join each other to merge their efforts even after weeks and months. (OT: The IDNA stuff announced to be published yesterday is still in the works. Got stuck on extension testing and bug-hunt...Sorry for that. Guess we're getting some stuff together until Friday morning) -- david rech