Re: [PEPr] -1 for RFC::Error Handling Guidelines for

On Mon Aug 30, 2004 at 06:0054PM +0100, Sergio Carvalho wrote: > It's a moot discussion. For good and evil, the RFC has been approved, > following the standard procedure for PEAR. This is the basis for work we > have now, so let's build on it and correct where needed. There's much > work to be done defining warnings, and this should start with a package > proposal -- unlike exceptions, warnings will require some > infrastructure, and naturally there are lots of design possibilities. So let's try to put this to an end (for the time being): I think that Sergio deserves kudos for covering this touchy topic and no matter if people agree with the RfC in its current form, we all should give him time to recover a bit and to try to incorporate the latecomer suggestions from Stig et al. into the RfC. -- - Martin Martin Jansen http://martinjansen.com/