Re: Requiring SCM

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:27:46 -0500 chuck@horde.org (Chuck Hagenbuch) wrote: > Quoting Pierre-Alain Joye <pierre@dotgeek.org>: > > > Please rephrase, I miss what are your objections :) or is it > > simply that you do not want to have public SVC as requiremnts > > for PEAR packages? > > Correct. > > > I would like to force people to use a public sources versions > > control system for any package available through PEAR. > > And I say that I don't think that's a good idea. I think there is > a better argument for forcing everyone to use cvs.php.net than > there is for this. > > For one thing, it creates enforcement/policy problems. Consider: > > - package is proposed. It's in accessible CVS somewhere other than > cvs.php.net - package is accepted > - one or two releases are made > - CVS goes away (hosting dies, lapses, whatever) > > What do you do now? Sure, you can answer that, but I'd rather not > get into the position of *having* to answer it. I don't see the > need. Got the point. In theory, our QA team should warn the maintainers to set back a CVS server or use the php.net cvs. It's not like this kind of issues will be that dramatic. But could be right after a release for example ;) How I will resolve it? If you they are not able to setup back a cvs, and say: "hello, you have an account with cvs.php.net/pear/Foo karma, use it from now.". As I said earlier, I would like to force the php.net cvs server, without that much choices, but this is my dream and your nightmares ;-) --Pierre