Re: solution for those depending on PEAR packages with

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.

Also keep in mind that the same situation can be created for people working with another channel where there is no QA or policy. So even if you did believe that PEAR works as promised, other people may still need this when they use other non pear channels in their code. regards, Lukas