Re: solution for those depending on PEAR packages with

On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 14:28 -0400, Scott Mattocks wrote: > Helgi Þormar wrote: > > > On Fri, 2005-04-22 at 13:56 -0400, Greg Beaver wrote: > > > > > >>The QA team will wait for up to 6 months to make sure a package is > >>unmaintained before acting. There have been cases of packages with > >>fixes taking 2 years to release - I think this is necessary. > > > > > > I agree with Greg, it would be nice to support this in any way. > > I don't disagree that this would be nice to support, but PEAR already > has policies in place to prevent this kind of feature from being needed. > I think it would be better to enforce those policies than to spend time > and effort on work arounds. The QA team has the right to patch and > release major issues within 14 days and minor issues within a month if > the developer can't be contacted. Again, I understand the reality of the > situation, but you can't deny that if there was enough interest in > fixing an issue it would be done in two weeks. > > I just wanted to put that out there before Greg puts a lot of time and > effort into something that, theoretically at least, shouldn't be needed. Yes things like serious bugs and similar can be out rather quickly, tho 2 weeks is actually very slow for business people :) But features are a different story, like Greg said, around a half year until QA can do anything real about feature requests :) But well it's up to Greg, if he wants to work on this then it's his choice ... I see no harm in this at least if it won't impact the performance because this is a rather nifty feature :) - Helgi