Re[2]: [PEAR-DEV] Re: Looking docs on a site. QA

Hello Pierre-Alain, PAJ> Yes, everybody likes to know what QA team plan to do and like to PAJ> adapt a bit if required. PAJ> The QA list still remains the right place to clean what you are PAJ> talking about. The active QA people there are pear developers as PAJ> well and know very well our needs since quit a few monthes now. I PAJ> think we all trust them enough to let them go on a consensus for any PAJ> new ideas, concepts or rules. I don't know any of you. After reading RFC I don't have reasons to trust QA. I don't know any of them and I ask here who are these people to decide such things for you. From the voting about QA - there are 7 members in QA and there are 7 votes. That's strange assuming that there are more, than 200 developers. Also strange thing about votings that there are no votings displayed against RFC, but they present. 1/8 of 200 is 25 people who voted against. It looks more like a bunch of politicians on top of developers community. Even if one against - his opinion must be taken into account and discussed separately. If there are three of them - then you should think about rewriting rules, but if there are 25 of them then how can this QA exist? PAJ> The best thing to do is to talk about that on this list, then, when PAJ> you are done with the questions (that means having kind of answers, PAJ> skipping the "noise" for most of us) you can post it on the proposal PAJ> system, ask for comments and finally for votes (if you plan to PAJ> change strongly how developer's life will be). I'm not a developer and will not become one until there will be more clear statement, what QA don't have rights to take away my authorship, that it can't demand something from me until my package is not in PFC. I can't get a account until I agree to contribute my package. I can't post to proposal system until I get an account. See the problem? I can't submit my package until I'll be absolutely sure that nobody will touch my rights and will not limit my freedom if I agreed to follow the rules that are clear to me. And that rules are stated in requirements. I also against that I must ask for permission to release a package. I don't care about QA managing PFC, but why I have to ask what to do with my sources? By submitting package I agreed, that I will provide quality code and support for what I've made. It is written in requirements. What is QA to judge who is bad developer who is good? -- TiP