Re: Re: Publicly listed channels (was [PEAR-DEV] Considering package proposal:

Alan Knowles wrote: >The points you have listed below point to a slightly fuzzy logic, in >terms of registering a channel. PEAR as a group of people with lots of >varying opinions, may not be the perfect enviroment for deciding who >should be added, and who should not. The current voting solved a similar >issue about deciding which packages should be added, One idea is to >perhaps use it to propose a channels, in that it would be clearer and >the comments about the channel at proposal stage may give people an idea >how the channel is regarded... > >However, I guess some would see it as if pear was 'recommending' these >channels by listing them on pear.php.net. (although our current list has >sort of crept in over time, without much thought) > >Another idea is that either channels.php.net or >www.php.net/channels.html would, like the links page on www.php.net, be >a neutral place to list them, there is no implied recommendation. It >would also free up the decision making for the process.... and also >enable the listing of projects that most of the pear developers would >never go near, yet benefit PHP in the bigger picture... +1 for http://channels.php.net where developers could register their channels (even better is Channel Servers could automatically register using a protocol and be pinged regularly to check availability) and the Channel Groups offers some sort of verification (this channel was 'verified' 2 weeks ago...). This would work like a tracker (bittorrent comes to mind maybe). >The reality is that you, or someone is going to have to commit for a >while to maintaining the list as well. (but I guess that was assumed.) In my idea a Channel Group might do this maintenance job. Channels shouldn't be mixed with PEAR in order to avoid the confusion as they might also be PHP Extensions channels, or whatever not related to PEAR in any way except the package.xml file. Greg's idea of accepting only some channels defeats the point of having channels. It's a chicken and egg problem. You accept only popular channels but you don't help them to become popular by registering them. And is the size of the user base an accurate criteria ? Some very useful maths channels (think Jesus... ;) ) might only be used by a few people. Bertrand Mansion Mamasam