Re: Requiring SCM

On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 09:08 -0500, Chuck Hagenbuch wrote: > Quoting Pierre-Alain Joye <pierre@dotgeek.org>: > > > PEAR packages must have a public CVS, I tend to want it in the > > cvs.php.net/pear repository but cannot be a requirement. > > Strongly against. I'd rather just require that packages be in > cvs.php.net CVS than see this requirement; it puts a high burden on > developers. Must have own server and hosting, etc. Of course with > channels there isn't much of a reason anymore to put up with this kind > of micromanagement - but I still think it's a mistake. Why do I think you're misunderstanding in the same way as Richard ? This isn't micromanagement, it's a way to make the source available for everyone at all times and a up2date version if we're that lucky ;) We're not saying that people should setup their own servers and things like that ... If they don't feel like doing that, they can use PHP CVS, simple, but if they want to host their code at a other place, say in your case, cvs.horde.org then that's okey, just that we can get the code in one way or another and also would be good if we could view it online via browser ... Also this discussion has nothing to do with channels in fact ;-) If you don't want to have the package in PEAR and want to use channels, then fine, you don't have to comply to this "rule" but as long as you the package is in PEAR I see no reason why it shouldn't have accessible source :) I know you have nothing to worry about, all your packages have a online repo in one place or another and so do most of the packages in PEAR. Do you still feel the same after this explanation ? - Helgi